How to backup Photos library when not enough space on Mac for originals

[AlmightyKang]

Delete some photos. So many duplicates and crap ones. I spent a good deal of time in the last couple of years curating my data carefully and I'm good on a 256Gb machine now (I was on a 1TB one!).

Also when you drop dead one day, less for your family to go through. My father left me 4TB of NAS to deal with.

 

[IG88]

Synology system (already have)

I would suggest offloading a considerable amount of GB of pics to Synology Photos.

Just make sure to back up the NAS.

 

[henrikhelmers]

This looks like it might download and backup iCloud Photos (incrementally). Might serve as a disaster recovery tool https://bee.synology.com/en-global

 

[TracerAnalog]

I agree, I had a similar experience with backups stored on CD. All systems fail, and the original poster has said he backs up to Time Machine so I think this issue is not preservation of the photos, but access to them on any given day/time. My point was that worrying about a new device (SSD drive) failing is like worrying about getting in an accidents so you don't leave the house. Everyone will get into some type of an accident at some point, just like everyone will have a new device that fails prematurely at some point.

Oh I wasn’t disagreeing, just sharing my experiences. 😊

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I'm with AlmightyKang in #26. That library is probably full of photos you don't care about mixed with a smaller subset you do. Prune it down. I've seen libraries loaded with 30 "takes" of mostly the same selfie... presumably with plans to later look through each one to pick the one best selfie... but all 30 end up being kept. Nobody should need 30 "takes" of basically the same photo. Pick the 1 or 2 best ones and dump the other 28.

If every single photo is "must keep", plow through the library picking those that you want to have as mobile (always with you) on the laptop and create a new, much smaller Photos library for them. Move the original library out to external storage. Then you'll have "the best of them" always with you and using very little space and access to the bigger library should you ever need the ones not deemed "best."

Another option: pay up for some big cloud storage and upload all of the "not best of" photos to the cloud, so you have access to them in a pinch (when you don't have the external drive with you).

Another option: buy yourself a NAS like Synology and, among many other uses, set up your own cloud on it for the same benefit just referenced, MINUS the cloud space rental fee.

Another option: if none of the above work, drop the seduction of the "good deal" and buy the amount of storage you need to have ALL of them with you on an internal.

 

[TechnoMonk]

I have an external drive, and an Icloud backup. I don’t store all my images on Mac, it’s optimized to take up minimal storage as needed. I don’t want to waste my MBP drive with photos taking up big chunk of storage. I stick to 1 TB, if I I have to store photos on OS drive, it will probably be 2-4 TB.

 

[drrich2]

I might just be getting confused, but if you're out in the field and need to grab a photo, how does the larger storage machine at home holding the library help?

A big question is specifically what 'larger storage machine' is referred to. From what I understand, at least some NAS can be set up for remote online access. If that is the case, one could in theory have the main photo library on a NAS at home, and access those photos from out in the field, continent upon having line access (perhaps via a smart phone).

 

[JamesMay82]

I feel like you and I've always run 256Gb machines and all photo and video libraries offloaded onto external drives which worked. Fast forward to now and I finally got a machine that can hold all my data and its a dream! I couldn't go back and If like you wouldn't like the compromise.

I'd just splash out and get the machine you need.

 

[BLtheP]

A big question is specifically what 'larger storage machine' is referred to. From what I understand, at least some NAS can be set up for remote online access. If that is the case, one could in theory have the main photo library on a NAS at home, and access those photos from out in the field, continent upon having line access (perhaps via a smart phone).

He mentioned the savings of this laptop will allow him to get a Mac Mini if I read it right, which I am assuming is what is planned to be used for storing the full library.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

A big question is specifically what 'larger storage machine' is referred to. From what I understand, at least some NAS can be set up for remote online access. If that is the case, one could in theory have the main photo library on a NAS at home, and access those photos from out in the field, continent upon having line access (perhaps via a smart phone).

Synology for one (of likely many) can definitely do this. And it can be configured as a free personal cloud for easy access to files like photos from anywhere.

If the "larger storage machine" is as BLtheP just considered- a Mac Mini- OP could:

• attach all the external storage needed to the Mini,
• install the "too big" photos library on Mini storage,
• prune the laptop photos to the best ones (for always with OP),
• set up remote access to that Mini and-
• when OP needs a photo(s) not in the "best of" with him/her, access it on the Mini remotely and upload it to free iCloud or Dropbox or similar space on the spot to then download to the MB in the field.

This would be a workaround to having to pay some ongoing rent for cloud space to store the photos.

There are also those "lifetime" plans from select cloud storage options. Spend a few hundred and buy 500GB or more space for "life*" While I doubt life* will equal an actual lifetime and OP may not want to trust total strangers with their photo collection, that is also a relatively cheap way to have access to all of them without a monthly rental.

On a quick search just now, I see 500GB for $200 lifetime* from one... and there are occasional deals offered around here and other Mac fan sites that pitch lifetime* cloud for fixed fee amounts. A concerted effort to "shop around" would probably do better than that. I wouldn't trust the cloud with the only copy of the bigger library but that could be an option for OP if they want the special deal and access to all photos without buying a Synology, Mac mini, pruning, etc.

If was moved to do this, I'd buy a big hard drive or two, backup my big library on a couple of drives I control and then upload them to strangers in the cloud. Then, if lifetime* actually turns out to mean when they run out of cash flow and suddenly shut down with no access to anyone's files, I still have my big library backed up at least twice on drives I control.

And if the photos are important to me, one of those drives I control is stored offsite to protect against fire/flood/theft scenarios.

 

[JamesMay82]

One thing I use to do was export all my images to an external drive of your choice, I prefer the Samsung T7. I did then organised these via year and month in finder folders.

I then selected optimised media on my Macs so I only had a low res version on my laptop and desktop. When I took new photos I would then just export originals to my external drive.

This worked fine for me but just remember to back up you external drive. I've since gotten a larger SSD in my Mac and this is a much preferred option for me as its convenient.

Interesting I didn't find me exporting many new photos as most shots I did were screen shots to remind me of things. I was only really exporting the photos of family trips out etc.

 

[Mcrumors David]

Is there a better option?

What's the problem with iCloud Photos again (using "optimized")?

 

[Mcrumors David]

Looks like they do make a 1TB card for about $100. Pretty excited at first, looks like a perfect solution. Until... multiple reviewers says that theirs failed after 3 months, 8 months, etc.
...

Just get a 1TB microSD from Sandisk

 

[JamesMay82]

What's the problem with iCloud Photos again (using "optimized")?

its not stored locally and is a pain to have to download every time you want to share photos with people. its not easy to back up either as you have to also download every time to export photos to a back up hard drive.

Also at present there is a bug in Sonoma where it doesn't download your photos anymore they just stay stuck in the cloud for certain machines.

 

[Mcrumors David]

its not stored locally and is a pain to have to download every time you want to share photos with people. its not easy to back up either as you have to also download every time to export photos to a back up hard drive.

Also at present there is a bug in Sonoma where it doesn't download your photos anymore they just stay stuck in the cloud for certain machines.

Well, the 1TD Sandisk works great. My Photo-Lib is about 380gb, regardless of my SSD-Size, I just don't want that on there... (especially for that fxxxxking photolib.d process that's always running🤢)

 

[nph]

I have had 2 sandisk drives fail recently , one luckily only a backup drive, catastrophic, neither pc or Mac with tools could even recognize the drive, Samsung has always worked for me

 

[JamesMay82]

Well, the 1TD Sandisk works great. My Photo-Lib is about 380gb, regardless of my SSD-Size, I just don't want that on there... (especially for that fxxxxking photolib.d process that's always running🤢)

good point! I've switched over to Lightroom due to Sonoma bug but they still have creative cloud process running in background but just figured how to switch it off.

 

[flynz4]

its not stored locally and is a pain to have to download every time you want to share photos with people. its not easy to back up either as you have to also download every time to export photos to a back up hard drive.

Also at present there is a bug in Sonoma where it doesn't download your photos anymore they just stay stuck in the cloud for certain machines.

My experience is not at all like yours. On my main home machine (Mac Studio), every photo downloads immediately. I have it set to always "Download Originals to this Mac". This is the machine that I back up locally (Time Machine) and to the cloud (Backblaze). I also created a clone which gets updated every night using Carbon Copy Cloner.

Everything that I do on any of my other machines... my primary laptop (M1 MBP), my secondary laptop (Intel MBP), my 13" iPad, my 11" iPad, my iPhone 15 Pro... all of that instantly syncs back to my Mac Studio. Hence... everything gets backed up in real time.

BTW: I do NOT consider iCloud or other syncing services to be "backup". Yes, in most cases, it probably is the most convenient method to recover from a disaster... but a true backup solution (ex: Backblaze), allows you to turn back the clock and recover from a pre-disaster state.

BTW: I have owned several storage arrays (NAS, Home Server, Thunderbolt RAID 10) and every one eventually died on me. This was NOT a result of losing a drive. In all cases, the actual storage array box died. I will never buy another one... they are obsolete technology. Cloud storage is the answer.

My goal is to have one place to automatically store 100% of my data (my Mac Studio)... back it up so that even if my house burned down, and I lost 100% of my machines... I could walk into an Apple Store, get any new equipment, and be up and running in very little time, while losing zero data. I believe I have accomplished that.

/Jim

 

[weezin]

My experience is not at all like yours. On my main home machine (Mac Studio), every photo downloads immediately. I have it set to always "Download Originals to this Mac". This is the machine that I back up locally (Time Machine) and to the cloud (Backblaze). I also created a clone which gets updated every night using Carbon Copy Cloner.

Everything that I do on any of my other machines... my primary laptop (M1 MBP), my secondary laptop (Intel MBP), my 13" iPad, my 11" iPad, my iPhone 15 Pro... all of that instantly syncs back to my Mac Studio. Hence... everything gets backed up in real time.

BTW: I do NOT consider iCloud or other syncing services to be "backup". Yes, in most cases, it probably is the most convenient method to recover from a disaster... but a true backup solution (ex: Backblaze), allows you to turn back the clock and recover from a pre-disaster state.

BTW: I have owned several storage arrays (NAS, Home Server, Thunderbolt RAID 10) and every one eventually died on me. This was NOT a result of losing a drive. In all cases, the actual storage array box died. I will never buy another one... they are obsolete technology. Cloud storage is the answer.

My goal is to have one place to automatically store 100% of my data (my Mac Studio)... back it up so that even if my house burned down, and I lost 100% of my machines... I could walk into an Apple Store, get any new equipment, and be up and running in very little time, while losing zero data. I believe I have accomplished that.

/Jim

What do you clone your Studio to (via CCC)? Something local I assume?

And for your last statement, in that scenario you would request a download of all of your Backblaze data, correct? How much data do you have?

I ask as I'm considering Backblaze as well and am curious how much time it would take to get 2 TB of data back to me in the case that I lost everything. It seems like it would take a while...

 

[InfoTime]

Any issues with Backblaze and the Photos library? Seems like that might be a challenge.

 

[flynz4]

Any issues with Backblaze and the Photos library? Seems like that might be a challenge.

I’ve never had to recover from Backblaze. I’ve read reports of others recovering without any errors.

In addition to Backblaze and Time Machine, I do have CCC run a complete incremental clone of my 4TB SSD every night. I also create a clone of my “irreplaceable media” nightly, which contains 100% of my photos and old camcorder videos of the kids. Everything else is fundamentally replaceable.

So if I was to lose everything in say a house fire, then I would probably recover from iCloud. If my iCloud account somehow was gone, my wife‘s iCloud account has all our photos as well. If her account was gone too, I’d fall back onto Backblaze.

Finally… this is not always up to date, but I also use CCC to clone my irreplaceable media to a pair of HDDs, one of which is always in mt corporate office. It might be a month or two stale… but my photos go back decades, and that is more valuable
than the last month or two.

The key to making all of this work is to have a single place where everything lives… and then back it up and clone it to different physical locations… mostly without relying on human intervention.

 

[JamesMay82]

My experience is not at all like yours. On my main home machine (Mac Studio), every photo downloads immediately. I have it set to always "Download Originals to this Mac". This is the machine that I back up locally (Time Machine) and to the cloud (Backblaze). I also created a clone which gets updated every night using Carbon Copy Cloner.

Everything that I do on any of my other machines... my primary laptop (M1 MBP), my secondary laptop (Intel MBP), my 13" iPad, my 11" iPad, my iPhone 15 Pro... all of that instantly syncs back to my Mac Studio. Hence... everything gets backed up in real time.

BTW: I do NOT consider iCloud or other syncing services to be "backup". Yes, in most cases, it probably is the most convenient method to recover from a disaster... but a true backup solution (ex: Backblaze), allows you to turn back the clock and recover from a pre-disaster state.

BTW: I have owned several storage arrays (NAS, Home Server, Thunderbolt RAID 10) and every one eventually died on me. This was NOT a result of losing a drive. In all cases, the actual storage array box died. I will never buy another one... they are obsolete technology. Cloud storage is the answer.

My goal is to have one place to automatically store 100% of my data (my Mac Studio)... back it up so that even if my house burned down, and I lost 100% of my machines... I could walk into an Apple Store, get any new equipment, and be up and running in very little time, while losing zero data. I believe I have accomplished that.

/Jim

that's how I use to do it but for some reason the latest Sonoma prevented it from downloading locally. it was also on a new studio and just wouldn't download. I re installed my wife's m1 air and same thing happened. there is a thread on here complaining about it all.

one thing to consider is apple photos uses a packaged library so potentially if you lost everything and bought a new machine it might not be able to read the library if they were running a much newer OS. or you could have issues if the library became corrupt.

all extremely unlikely of course.

 

[Paul Deemer]

I get you want to save some money and get a good deal. But just above every review I have seen where people are using MacBooks and have a large catalog of photos and videos the reviewers recommended 1 Tb storage. They go on to say that adding more than that is highway robbery by Apple which of course it is. But I think you will regret it in the long run if you don't pay the extra for the 1 Tb option. Especially since you don't seem in favor of an external drive. If your MacBook drive is almost full at 512gb you're going to suffer performance issues and have to start deleting things to free up space at some point. Is that worth the hassle of saving a little money for the 512gb model?

 

[JamesMay82]

I get you want to save some money and get a good deal. But just above every review I have seen where people are using MacBooks and have a large catalog of photos and videos the reviewers recommended 1 Tb storage. They go on to say that adding more than that is highway robbery by Apple which of course it is. But I think you will regret it in the long run if you don't pay the extra for the 1 Tb option. Especially since you don't seem in favor of an external drive. If your MacBook drive is almost full at 512gb you're going to suffer performance issues and have to start deleting things to free up space at some point. Is that worth the hassle of saving a little money for the 512gb model?

It’s cheaper long term than paying for iCloud storage in perpetuity as well. Based on 2TB storage plan

 

[InfoTime]

Is that worth the hassle of saving a little money for the 512gb model?

Yes. The "little money" in this case was $955.

Not the $200 difference Apple charges. I bought a two month old M3 Pro MBP from a client at a huge savings. To get 1TB the best I could do using an Apple employee friend's 15% off would have cost $955 more.