Resolved How much hard drive space do you recommend for a noob photographer?

[100Teraflops]

Just a couple of thoughts (background... I shoot a 5DII, have 750GB of images, and have a MacPro with 6.5TB of internal storage + external no-caddy drive bays for backups).

Don't buy 350/500GB drives. They're older technology, and they're no longer the most cost effective in terms of GB/$.

The sweet spot for GB/$ is in the larger disks - 1TB to 2TB - and these disks will also be faster, as the data is packed tighter on the disk surface. You'll read more bits off the platter for every disk revolution.

Make sure you have a good backup strategy in place - and design that from the very beginning. Back up to external drives and try and keep a copy offsite. I also use an internal partition as a TimeMachine disk - just for my boot drive.

Edit. Oh yes... one more thing. RAID IS NOT A BACKUP... and don't trust anyone who tells you it is. RAID will ONLY protect you against disk crashes, NOT against accidental deletion, theft, water damage, electrical glitches, virus action, fire, accidental damage which together are more likely than a disk crash. To be safe, you need three copies of data, one of which should be in a separate location.

Another HDD space junkie! I will buy 1 or 2 TB drives for the Mac Pro. However, what if I buy 1 TB drives and they puke before I fill them up? I am not being a smart @@S, just asking a legitimate question, as that scenario is my only concern. Also, thanks for clarifying that RAID is not for backup. my good friend uses RAID to backup, but he never writes to his drives, only reads. They are for storing tons of movies and games. Off-site storage is a big deal with photographers and I understand the benefits, but I never would have added 1+1. LOL

I am still thinking about my backup plan, but I have plenty of options thanks to the photographer community! As I stated in my last reply, I will clear my mind this weekend and in all likelihood, order a new Mac Pro 8 core soon.

 

[Mr.Noisy]

Are you using striping from OS X or did you set you RAID 1 with only two drives?
I a new Mac Pro is not expected until 4Q 2011 or 2012. I do not want to wait that long for a stupid processor chipset. A few months is optimal, but 6-8 is not feasible. Thanks again for sharing knowledge and swapping ideas!

hey 100Teraflops glad your getting some good advice, the good monitor is a must for photography, check the dell 2209wa (i think it's still about) or the HP 2310i, both nice monitors, but the internal raid i have is a software raid 1 mirror, works well for my needs. Are you really sure you want to wait for the 'latest' Mac Pro? do you need the latest chipset? there are plenty of great deals on used machines, ideal for photography, save the $$$ on the MP and spend the rest on some quality Lenses, I know a photographer that uses a G5 with no problems

remember as firestater states, raid is no back up plan, I use a raid 1 external system as it suits my needs.

 

[100Teraflops]

hey 100Teraflops glad your getting some good advice, the good monitor is a must for photography, check the dell 2209wa (i think it's still about) or the HP 2310i, both nice monitors, but the internal raid i have is a software raid 1 mirror, works well for my needs. Are you really sure you want to wait for the 'latest' Mac Pro? do you need the latest chipset? there are plenty of great deals on used machines, ideal for photography, save the $$$ on the MP and spend the rest on some quality Lenses, I know a photographer that uses a G5 with no problems

remember as firestater states, raid is no back up plan, I use a raid 1 external system as it suits my needs.

Buying an older machine has crossed my mind. I will checkout the monitors, as I am not very picky, at least not yet. Thanks for clarifying your RAID 1 setup, as I am finally grasping the concept of RAID let alone when combined with the Mac Pro.

Also, I have not thought about a used Mac Pro from e-bay etc.., as an Apple refurb is nice, because I have a piece of mind with the warranty and I want to buy one-to-one in order to receive 'accredited' instruction pertaining to OS X, iLife, and all the included goodies. But you are right, I can save a lot of money and buy a camera, some glass, a case, and extra memroy cards on top of a Mac Pro. Food for thought!

I have to contact Apple regarding one-to-one, because I need to know if I can add it after my purchase. I know the web-site says something similar to this: "...with the purchase of a new machine...," but Apple reps have been known to bend the rules. I want a 6 core or 8 core, but I am still thinking that a quad core will suffice for my editing, photography, and software needs. The difference between the aforementioned machines is measured by seconds, for the most part. Did I just talk myself out of a 6 or 8 core? Ultimately, I have to decide before Thunderbolt is replaced by Lightningbolt! LOL

 

[marsmissions]

At first you won't need more than 1 terabyte. Honestly...also, TWO cores is enough to do heavy photo editing AND listen to music while you're doing it.

Also, keep in mind that harddrives last 5-6 years....CD's and DVD's can last decades. Back up important data to CD's and DVD's and keep them safe...

If you ever go into photography as a pro, and somebody wants a copy of their wedding photos it would be nice if you're able to provide it 20 years after the occasion. Photo prints don't last hundreds of years, eventually the prints may need to be reprinted

Keep these things in mind.

 

[firestarter]

Another HDD space junkie! I will buy 1 or 2 TB drives for the Mac Pro. However, what if I buy 1 TB drives and they puke before I fill them up?

Seriously, if you can't find a use for 1TB of space in 3 or 4 years, then you probably shouldn't be buying a MacPro.

Most photography apps don't need lots of cores (they just don't use them). The only appeal of a MacPro to a photographer is the expandability - lots of drives, interchangeable graphics cards. If you don't need the expandability, iMacs are much much better value machines.

If you're seriously worried about saving $30 by buying a slower 500GB drive instead of a faster 1TB drive, you're definitely wasting cash spending $3000 on a MacPro.

I am not being a smart @@S, just asking a legitimate question, as that scenario is my only concern. Also, thanks for clarifying that RAID is not for backup. my good friend uses RAID to backup, but he never writes to his drives, only reads. They are for storing tons of movies and games.

Is that right? How did the data get on to the RAID in the first place?

If your friend only has one copy of his files (on the RAID) then he doesn't have a backup. Backup = an alternate copy.

Not writing to that RAID doesn't make it magically safer... Your friend should get a backup if he's smart and he values his data.

Off-site storage is a big deal with photographers and I understand the benefits, but I never would have added 1+1. LOL

Not so funny when a thief breaks into your house and steals your Mac and the backup drive sat on the table next to it. Proper backups aren't just for professionals - they're for anyone who actually cares about keeping their data.

For someone with a $3000 Mac, a couple of hundred $ to buy enough disks to keep offsite copies is nothing.

I am still thinking about my backup plan, but I have plenty of options thanks to the photographer community! As I stated in my last reply, I will clear my mind this weekend and in all likelihood, order a new Mac Pro 8 core soon.

Sounds like you should be looking at an iMac.

 

[100Teraflops]

At first you won't need more than 1 terabyte. Honestly...also, TWO cores is enough to do heavy photo editing AND listen to music while you're doing it.

Also, keep in mind that harddrives last 5-6 years....CD's and DVD's can last decades. Back up important data to CD's and DVD's and keep them safe...

If you ever go into photography as a pro, and somebody wants a copy of their wedding photos it would be nice if you're able to provide it 20 years after the occasion. Photo prints don't last hundreds of years, eventually the prints may need to be reprinted

Keep these things in mind.

Thanks for reiterating the value of media and I will

The 27" iMac all in one is a nice system, but I desire expansion. Also, I want to perform all the work on my computer. I am sure a two core would suffice, but I am honed in on a Mac Pro, as it is my only solution.

 

[100Teraflops]

"Seriously, if you can't find a use for 1TB of space in 3 or 4 years, then you probably shouldn't be buying a MacPro."

I can!

"Most photography apps don't need lots of cores (they just don't use them). The only appeal of a MacPro to a photographer is the expandability - lots of drives, interchangeable graphics cards. If you don't need the expandability, iMacs are much much better value machines."

This machine will serve multiple purposes, not only photography. However, I have thought about an iMac, but no can do!


"If you're seriously worried about saving $30 by buying a slower 500GB drive instead of a faster 1TB drive, you're definitely wasting cash spending $3000 on a MacPro."

Noted! I value opinions and personal advice.

"Is that right? How did the data get on to the RAID in the first place?

If your friend only has one copy of his files (on the RAID) then he doesn't have a backup. Backup = an alternate copy.

Not writing to that RAID doesn't make it magically safer... Your friend should get a backup if he's smart and he values his data."

I meant after he safed data to the drive, he does not access it on a daily basis. Although I agree with you, my friend will not. LOL He has been doing this for years.

"Not so funny when a thief breaks into your house and steals your Mac and the backup drive sat on the table next to it. Proper backups aren't just for professionals - they're for anyone who actually cares about keeping their data.

For someone with a $3000 Mac, a couple of hundred $ to buy enough disks to keep offsite copies is nothing."

I shall not be frugile any longer. Way to drive home the point! School has ended today. Also, sounds like you are speaking from experience.

Sounds like you should be looking at an iMac.

As stated before, I want and need the expansion of the Mac Pro.

 

[snberk103]

...
Sounds like you should be looking at an iMac.

As stated before, I want and need the expansion of the Mac Pro.

My own reason for getting my Mac Pro (2008 Octo Core) was that I intend the keep the computer for 3 - 5 years. Now that I'm just starting my 3rd year I'm confident that I can hit the 5 year mark. My personal feelings are that Mac Pros are for long-term ownership. At least for us small businesses. I know some big corps swap them out every couple of years.

iMacs are a better value for the computing power, but I don't believe they are suitable for long-term ownership. I don't actually think they are hard to expand, if you don't mind a stack of FW 800 HDDs.

Photo editing doesn't actually require a fantastic video card. It just needs to display accurate colour. More expensive cards are for gaming and movies, where things are moving at a rapid rate. If you don't do those things, then I don't believe you need to worry about upgrading the video card.

Memory is another matter.

Mac Pros support more, except for perhaps a small overlap between the low-end MP and high-end iMac (don't know that for sure, but it wouldn't surprise me). Time moves on, applications demand more RAM. I know that my MP still has lots and lots of expansion left in that department. Incidentally, giving your OS, Applications, etc enough RAM is the single most effective way to speed up your workflow. The moment you start writing to virtual memory you are start bogging down.

One thing to keep in mind is that for Mac Pros, you get a RAM slot per processor. So, all other things being equal (same type of architecture in the MP) an 8 core MP can handle more RAM than a 6 core, and a 4 core can handle the least. Do some research on your RAM needs (current and future) before jumping on an 8 core machine just for the RAM ceiling. You very likely will never need that much. But... there it is.

A Mac Pro is also more easily fixed, I believe. Something to consider if you are thinking long-term.

Apple promised something called Grand Central Dispatch in 2010 or 2011, yet to be delivered. Check it out on the Apple site. It promised to make it easier for application developers to multi-thread their programs. Photo editing suites are not really taking advantage of this, yet. But if they ever do an older multi-cored machine should stay current for a few more years.

My thinking is: If you want to get a really good machine now, and think you'll be getting another one in a 1-3 years then go iMac. When you buy peripherals for it, make sure that they will also work on a Mac Pro, so you can upgrade easily.

If you want a machine for 3-5 years, then think Mac Pro. More $$ up front, but I think you will save money over the 5 years.

Just some more grist for your mill.

everything here is, imho, of course....

 

[Eaton Photos]

OP,

You have received quite a great amount of advice, since I posted earlier in the thread. As Firestarter, so eloquently pointed out, RAID is not Back-up per-say, rather it is a storage solution. I use various RAID configurations, because they work for me. I went with RAID 1 & RAID 1+0 (10) storage setups, because they are what works for me & my work-flow. I shoot way too much, to be using DVD's as a storage solution.

From my experience, I have yet to encounter someone, that has a had a CD/DVD last more than a Decade. IMO, that type of statement is not valid, till we've had DVD-R's for two decades or so, and can prove that they are still readable years later. Lab Testing, doesn't count for crap in real life.

I bought my Mac Pro on eBay, and have yet to encounter any issues with it. It is a 1st Gen (1,1), and has worked flawlessly. After I received it, I added 12GB of Ram, and re-configured the HDD Bays for my needs.
Bay 1: 250GB for OS, Documents, & Apps
Bay 2: 1TB 7200, for Scratch and only Scratch. I have it setup for both CS5 & Final Cut, but that's it. I do not use it for anything else.
Bay 3: 1TB 7200. OSX RAID 1
Bay 4: 1TB 7200. OSX RAID 1

Both 3 & 4, are linked together via OSX, in a RAID 1 Configuration. I use the RAID 1 primarily for active files that I am rendering/ working from (i.e. Images & Videos), however, I also make a clone of the 250GB HDD, that I regularly update, as files are created/ edited.

Though Designer Dale, pointed out that I am a Pro, I also started out learning the ropes through mostly trial & error, of what to buy & what not to buy. That is a rather expensive road however, and forums didn't exist back in the late 90's & early 00's, like they do today. Whether your a Pro, a Hobbyist, or a Beginner, it doesn't really matter when it comes to storage. Storing & backing up Images/ Videos/ Files, is just part of the modern digital age. When I am asked about cameras' to buy, I suggest to anyone, that is looking to invest into the newer DSLR's/ HDSLR's, to also invest in large HDD's to back up the rather large images, that are captured by the newer bodies.

Snberk103, has hit the nail on the head, regarding his most recent post. Mac Pro's are typically a longer term investment. Though I bought a 1st Gen, it is quite sufficient for running CS5 in 64 Bit, and Rendering video in Final Cut.

Here is an example of daily usage on my MP: I typically have 6-10 Apps running at any given time, and though I have PS CS5 maxed out, Ram allotment wise (80% of total Ram), I never max out all 12 gigs. Highest I have ever hit, with both CS5 & FC running @ 100% + FireFox & PhotoMechanic is 9 of 12GB. If I leave FF running for days on end, then it will consume 1-1.5GB of Ram on its own, and I will start getting paging issues on certain sites. Even though the MP is a 1,1, it is expandable to 32GB of Ram.

I also have a Spring 2008 24" iMac (2.4 C2D, 4GB Ram, 250GB HDD), and it does well running CS3, FF, & PhotoMechanic. But the iMac is nearly maxed out Ram wise, and doesn't offer the expandability of the Mac Pro. However, since I bought the Mac Pro, the iMac is resigned to light duty, as it just doesn't stack up to the Mac Pro, though the iMac is several years newer.

The suggestion for an LCD to compliment your Mac Pro investment, is quite an important area to look into. I currently use the last generation of the 23" ACD. Color Accuracy is dead on, however, when I start looking for a replacement, I will be looking towards both the NEC PA Series Line-up (http://necdisplay.com/category/desktop-monitors) & also the Dell UltraSharp line-up (http://www.dell.com/content/topics/.../landing/en/ultrasharpmonitor?c=us&l=en&cs=04).

 

[dlegend]

I'm sure you don't want to hear this, but I think you're better off with an iMac or a mac mini with a nice IPS monitor. I understand that the mac pro is easier to expand, but if you plan on keeping it for 4 years you could buy a new mac mini every year and still come out the same.

Better to spend money on upgraded lenses and external backups.

 

[100Teraflops]

snberk103: thanks again for the explanation. You continue to provide food for thought. Also, initially, I will not rely on this machine as a "workstation/paycheck" so I have to re-think my strategy, maybe. Maybe I am not being realistic and an iMac will be plenty of machine for me! Although I do not buy the latest and greatest every week and that is why the Mac Pro is a viable option. A catch 22 if you know what I mean.


Eaton Photos: I viewed some of your photos via your link and they are perfect. Thank you for sharing your knowledge! I saw that you compute with an original Mac Pro. This RAID thing is definitely something to consider, but I do not want to bite off more than I can chew! Honestly, I am overwhelmed with information, and that is good. I have to re-think my goals and configure a machine accordingly. Your machine has been around the block so to speak and it is performing to your satisfaction. This is most encouraging to say the least.


dlegend: I appreciate the advice, as I do not take offense to you recommending an iMac! Trust me, I am still brainstorming whether it is a good choice. The mac Mini though, is not an option. Nothing wrong with them and if I wanted to buy a new machine every year or so, then that is the logical route due to Xs and Os.

I like the iMac and the 27" screen is awesome, and it must be viewed in person to be truly respected, but I understand it is not optimal for a photography. There are options to upgrade ram to 16 GB which is more than adequate for my needs. Now what I do not like. The HDD is burried behind the monitor. I am mechanically inclined, but I would not feel comfortable using a suction cup to remove the glass display in order to access the HDD. Honestly, this is my only concern and I countered it by ordering a machine with an SSD and 1 TB HDD respectively.

Thanks again for the advice, as I am indebt to the folks in the forum. Now I have to prioritize my needs: by placing my wants in the recycle bin and finally order a machine! Decisions, decisions.

EDIT: This thread serves as a great "this vs. that" discussion. Meaning, what do I want and/or what is required. Sometimes there is a vast difference between the two and I speak from experience.

 

[snberk103]

I blush, and thanks.

Just make sure that you let us know what it is you do end up with!

A Mini is also not a bad idea.

1) Get a refurbished one to save some bucks. Max out the RAM yourself - save bucks over Apple doing it.
2) Add FW external HDDs for storage. They can be used on a Mac Pro or an iMac later on.
3) With the money saved on the Mini, you can get a high quality monitor. Also transferable to a Mac Pro or an iMac later (as a 2nd monitor). A good monitor can used for several to many years comfortably. Imho, it's better to produce better photos (because the monitor is accurate) and wait some extra seconds, than to get a faster computer but put out photos with inaccurate colour.
4) Start investing in the SW tools that you will want/need. These are also transferable to a new system.
5) When you finally spring for a fully loaded, 24 core, 512MB RAM, 72 TB Storage, 4 graphic cards, 4 Thunderbolt ports iMac Pro Supreme Tower all of the peripherals and software moves too.

It's how I got started. A small Mini with a 23" ACD. Everything I bought to go with it also had to work with a (future) Mac Pro. Eventually I was working with Photoshop files that were approaching 1GB, on a Mini with only 1GB of memory (the days when opening a Mini involved spludging).

There was a lot of HDD thrashing. I was afraid that PS would crash, so I saved often. It took so long to save a big file, that I could go out and mow the lawn or do the dishes while it thrashed away. I got a lot of housework done that summer. Ironically, that Mini never crashed. Not once.

Eventually I got my current Mac Pro, and it was like moving from steam trains to warp drive. All the peripherals and SW moved too, so the only cost was the Mac Pro itself plus the extra HDDs I added at the time.

That Mini then got hooked up the TV where it served up all of our music throughout the house, and movies to the TV for a couple of years. I've upgraded that Mini to a newer one but the first one still works, and I keep it as a spare.

Nah... I just feel sentimental for it. What a workhorse!

 

[100Teraflops]

I blush, and thanks.

Just make sure that you let us know what it is you do end up with!

A Mini is also not a bad idea.

1) Get a refurbished one to save some bucks. Max out the RAM yourself - save bucks over Apple doing it.
2) Add FW external HDDs for storage. They can be used on a Mac Pro or an iMac later on.
3) With the money saved on the Mini, you can get a high quality monitor. Also transferable to a Mac Pro or an iMac later (as a 2nd monitor). A good monitor can used for several to many years comfortably. Imho, it's better to produce better photos (because the monitor is accurate) and wait some extra seconds, than to get a faster computer but put out photos with inaccurate colour.
4) Start investing in the SW tools that you will want/need. These are also transferable to a new system.
5) When you finally spring for a fully loaded, 24 core, 512MB RAM, 72 TB Storage, 4 graphic cards, 4 Thunderbolt ports iMac Pro Supreme Tower all of the peripherals and software moves too.

It's how I got started. A small Mini with a 23" ACD. Everything I bought to go with it also had to work with a (future) Mac Pro. Eventually I was working with Photoshop files that were approaching 1GB, on a Mini with only 1GB of memory (the days when opening a Mini involved spludging).

There was a lot of HDD thrashing. I was afraid that PS would crash, so I saved often. It took so long to save a big file, that I could go out and mow the lawn or do the dishes while it thrashed away. I got a lot of housework done that summer. Ironically, that Mini never crashed. Not once.

Eventually I got my current Mac Pro, and it was like moving from steam trains to warp drive. All the peripherals and SW moved too, so the only cost was the Mac Pro itself plus the extra HDDs I added at the time.

That Mini then got hooked up the TV where it served up all of our music throughout the house, and movies to the TV for a couple of years. I've upgraded that Mini to a newer one but the first one still works, and I keep it as a spare.

Nah... I just feel sentimental for it. What a workhorse!

Thank You for sharing as that is what I am thinking. I will buy 1333 ram no matter the machine I take home. I saw several refurb minis a few days ago, they were $500 or so.

Well, I had putter troubles from late last night into early this morning. I have to buy something A.S.A.P., damn. My workhorse 'beater' non-tablet machine finally puked. I knew it was on the way out, but I had hoped to get three more months of use, wishful thinking. I need a laptop for mobility, which includes current academic demands. I am deciding between a cheap Windows machine (south of $450.00) and/or a Mac Pro/iMac, or buy a MacBook Pro now, and then buy a Mac Pro/iMac later this year. I cannot afford to buy both a Macbook Pro and an iMac/Mac Pro right now. I want to buy a few programs and a camera too!

Well snberk103, I kept ya posted. i was lucky that my machine finally booted, and then I was able to backup my laptop. I have the dreaded blue screen of death! As I stated, I have cds/dvds of my photos and videos, but now I have another copy in an external hard drive. Thanks to the forum members who convinced me to create and utilize a backup plan immediately! It paid dividends less than three or four days later.

Nonetheless, I feel obligated to update the members who advised, assisted, and enlightened me throughout this thread. Thanks again, it is greatly appreciated! I will be an active member of this community and macrumors in general. I will contribute when and where possible. Now to study for finals, then research laptops! Luckily, I followed the MBP launch, so I have an idea of what I want.

Also, my iPad is saving my butt! What a handy device!

 

[firestarter]

Get the MacBook pro. When you need more disk space, get a nice fast external Thunderbolt disk (they'll be just as fast as internal disks on the MacPro).

The new MBP machines are really fast - coming up to the speed of my 3 year old 8 core MacPro.

Then buy an iMac in a year by which time it will have Thunderbolt too - and use your external drives on that.

 

[100Teraflops]

Get the MacBook pro. When you need more disk space, get a nice fast external Thunderbolt disk (they'll be just as fast as internal disks on the MacPro).

The new MBP machines are really fast - coming up to the speed of my 3 year old 8 core MacPro.

Then buy an iMac in a year by which time it will have Thunderbolt too - and use your external drives on that.

Sound plan! Honestly, I am convinced that I will buy an MBP early next week. Maybe tomorrow? I am leaving the Windows camp for awhile. Disclaimer: my laptop is three and a half years old and has served me well! A few times I have traveled out of state, but it mostly was treated as a desktop replacement.

Yes, Thunderbolt will be unbelievable fast! USB ?.?? LOL I cannot imagine the time that will be saved when backing up two to four 1 TB drives. I am excited to purchase an Apple computer! Since I am armed with knowledge form this thread, I will buy either a base 15" or the high end 15." The 17" MBP is awesome and my current laptop has a 17" screen, but IMHO, the MBP 17" is pricey. Although, I have been known to contradict my initial thoughts regarding an expensive purchase.

Damnit, now I have to study!

 

[compuwar]

I will buy either a base 15" or the high end 15." The 17" MBP is awesome and my current laptop has a 17" screen, but IMHO, the MBP 17" is pricey. Although, I have been known to contradict my initial thoughts regarding an expensive purchase.

If you plan to process and edit images on the road, th extra screen real-estate will be well-worth it. If not, just get a very good external monitor to use at home.

Paul

 

[100Teraflops]

If you plan to process and edit images on the road, th extra screen real-estate will be well-worth it. If not, just get a very good external monitor to use at home.

Paul

Compuwar, sorry Sir, it took awhile for me to reply. Thanks for the tip about editing on the road. I like the monitor Mr.Noisy recommended, the Dell 2209wa. People are raving about this monitor and amazon has them in stock. Thanks to all who have contributed!

 

[tmagman]

1TB total is often enough. I have just over that much that much spread over 3 external drives (2 320GB freeagent Go 1st generations, 1 500GB G-Drive Mini 7200rpm). That will fit a lot of pictures. My drives aren't full yet, and in fact I probably have only 500GB of space for pictures, as I duplicate the contents of the drives as a basic backup. (In other words- dont rely on a single drive).

When you're just starting out you'll take a lot of pictures, and I mean a lot. But over time once you learn your camera and photographic techniques that you like, you'll be able to get that 'perfect shot' with just one, so you won't be taking half as many pictures and that will take half as much space. (This is coming from a guy who took 7400 pictures in just two weeks in NYC and Washington DC).

 

[cooljoe349]

I have this

http://www.drobo.com/products/drobo.php

 

[Ruahrc]

I like the monitor Mr.Noisy recommended, the Dell 2209wa. People are raving about this monitor and amazon has them in stock. Thanks to all who have contributed!

I looked at that monitor on amazon. $599? Are you f@#($ kidding me? DO NOT buy this for $599. It's a fantastic monitor and I own two, but I paid a lot less than $599 for BOTH my monitors. If you're going to spend that kind of money on a screen, pick up a 24-27" wide gamut IPS model instead.

Even the updated U2211H may be a better alternative? It's still IPS, and has the "full HD" 1920x1080 resolution?

Ruahrc

 

[100Teraflops]

1TB total is often enough. I have just over that much that much spread over 3 external drives (2 320GB freeagent Go 1st generations, 1 500GB G-Drive Mini 7200rpm). That will fit a lot of pictures. My drives aren't full yet, and in fact I probably have only 500GB of space for pictures, as I duplicate the contents of the drives as a basic backup. (In other words- dont rely on a single drive).

When you're just starting out you'll take a lot of pictures, and I mean a lot. But over time once you learn your camera and photographic techniques that you like, you'll be able to get that 'perfect shot' with just one, so you won't be taking half as many pictures and that will take half as much space. (This is coming from a guy who took 7400 pictures in just two weeks in NYC and Washington DC).

Thanks for sharing your experiences with regard to your trip! I will buy additional external hard drives soon. I have narrowed down my options and I will buy something similar to the drobo. Maybe I will but it from OWC, as they have plenty external hard drive options. Since I am buying a laptop, I will be forced to use external hard drives. Granted, I can install the OWC doubler or something similar. Food for Thought!

I have this

http://www.drobo.com/products/drobo.php

Thank you Sir! I wil research this storage device.

I looked at that monitor on amazon. $599? Are you f@#($ kidding me? DO NOT buy this for $599. It's a fantastic monitor and I own two, but I paid a lot less than $599 for BOTH my monitors. If you're going to spend that kind of money on a screen, pick up a 24-27" wide gamut IPS model instead.

Even the updated U2211H may be a better alternative? It's still IPS, and has the "full HD" 1920x1080 resolution?

Ruahrc

Thanks for scouting this product and deaming it unworthy. If you paid 600 USD for both, then why the hell are they selling for 600 USD a piece? I want a 24", but not bigger than a 27" monitor. How long have you had your monitors?

 

[compuwar]

Thank you Sir! I wil research this storage device.

Unlike lots of people, I'm not a fan of most RAID schemes other than a RAID-1 mirror set. Once you start putting your critical data across multiple drives, a catastrophic multi-drive failure (and I've seen *lots* of those over my career) makes recovering any of your data anything from challenging and expensive to impossible.

I've done a fair bit of computer forensics in my recent past, both for commercial clients and for law enforcement- recovering data off a RAID device is often not fun at all- even when you have all the right equipment.

My position is that if it's important data, mirror it on two drives- and have good backups. When your unit of storage is one hard drive, an off-site backup of one hard drive is an easy thing to make/store/ship. When your unit of storage is 3-5 drives, then backups become more of a challenge.

With RAID-1, you can simply pull the mirror, add in a new drive and let the mirror rebuild to back up- that's easy and if you have a drive failure, normal drive recovery techniques get as much of your data back as is possible as quickly, cheaply and easily as possible. It doesn't give you blazing performance, and you have to buy 2x the number of drives, but it's reliable and easy, and for critical data in my opinion those trump everything else.

Paul

 

[firestarter]

Paul, I completely agree with you.

Multi disk RAID has valid uses, but its place is best left in the enterprise - where it can help to provide better uptime in an environment where replacement drives, controllers and copious backups are always on hand.

The worst thing about this sort of box in a domestic situation is the temptation for people to treat it as 'a backup'... they assume they don't need any other backup as the unit itself is more resilient (dead wrong!).

 

[-hh]

IMO, some 1TB's in a RAID1 should hold you for awhile.

Storage is truly a subjective matter. From a long term perspective, it will all depend on your needs & how many images you shoot/ expect to shoot. Anything you do, should have a redundancy back-up, whether it be a duplicate HDD, DVD's or storage online. However, as has also been pointed out, there is no need for Black's/ 7200 drives, when it comes to archiving. Green's/ 5900's are quite sufficient.

Agreed. What I find to be more resource intensive are the steps taken for redundancy to prevent total data loss.

And I thought I read that someone claimed that OS X has built-in RAID? I don't think that that's quite correct: the system can support a software-based RAID 1, but it still requires having two physical disk drives to be thus set up .. it isn't automatic.

The following is my own experience with how I needed to adjust for future growth:

When I switched to Digital SLR's in 2006, I invested in a pair of 500GB Seagate Free Agent External HDD's, to back up my images to. In 2008, I added a pair of 1TB Seagates in an External Enclosure, and configured them in RAID 1. This device is connected via FW800, and is blazing fast, where as the USB driven Free Agent's, seem to move at a snails pace, though they are USB 2. Up to this point my DSLR's only shot on avg an 8-10MB Raw File, so I wasn't burning through storage, all that fast. However, as newer tech has come out, larger files were inevitable.

"wasn't burning through ... all that fast." Well said .

I moved from a 4MP digital p&S to a dSLR in 2005/6 (8MP Canon 20D) which was what started my bit-burning. Retrospectively, the ~4000 images (RAW/JPG) from my first Africa trip was what I'd now consider a "mere" 40GB.

FWIW, I had a Seagate FreeAgent 750GB with the FW upgrade card from roughly this same time period as a backup; just had it go bad last month...ironically, not the HDD itself but somewhere in the electronic controller boards.

I also had two older 250GB PATA drives sitting around, which I made into an external FW800 RAID1 to use as a redundant backup to the Seagate 750.

During the Spring of 2010, I added (4) 2TB Caviar Green's in a Gigabit Network Array (NAS), and configured them in RAID 10 (1+0), thus giving me 4TB's of Storage, that I can access from anywhere. During the Fall of 2010, I added the 5DMKII to my gear line-up, and well 25MB+ Raw Files, are consuming storage much faster than I had previously. I have since filled up almost 2TB's on the NAS. Aside from all the Storage Arrays, I also have a Mac Pro, and have 3 1TB HDD's in it. Two are linked together in an OSX Raid 1 Config, the other 1TB is purely a scratch disk for CS5/ FCP, with my other non 1TB being my OS.

Circa 2009, I added a single 1TB NAS (it was a gift); third backup, although without any RAID protection. Impractically slow running off of a l100bT Ethernet connection, except as an "overnight" speed class data repository. FWIW, even with Gigabit, I'm not particularly convinced that a RAID 0 is needed to alleviate throughput bottlenecks; I'd probably consider changing that RAID 10 to just a RAID 1 and double your existing space.

Chronologically moving on...

IMO, current optical media storage (CD, DVD) runs out of capacity pretty quick. Some of the concerns over media longevity can also be a concern. As such, I've skipped these formats.

Spring '10, I added a Canon 7D, which at 18MP and 1080p video has eaten up the home system's remaining available disk space (particularly when one starts to create with iMovie). I'm still using mainly iPhoto and the library's just over 300GB this spring. So while that's still relatively small vs. a single 1TB drive, the time required to make copies of the whole thing does depend quite significantly on the transfer means (USB vs FW vs ...).

Based on my experience, and knowing that I will be needing more storage space, more than likely by the Fall of 2011, I will be adding 3TB drives to the Mac Pro, and expanding the storage capability of the External Enclosures, with 3TB Drives. Relatively speaking storage is cheap, and its better to have too much storage, than not enough.

And better to have redundancy to one's redundancy too. Its just another dimension of the risk management.

With the discovery of my fried Seagate FreeAgent, I've just added two "NewerTechnology" MAXimus RAID 1 external drives to my home system. The best value was their 2x 1TB configuration for $250, so got those, then also a pair of bare 2TB WD Greens: after 'relieving one of them of its OEM warranty', the one 1TB RAID1 became a 2TB RAID1.

My basic expectation is that I need 1TB of fully dedicated storage for the next ~2 years, of which I want to have two independent local RAID1 backups (these two RAID1 externals) in addition to the one copy still inside my ancient G5 PowerMac. What won't appear to make sense here then is why I immediately changed the one over to a 2TB RAID1. Basically, I wanted two things, the first of which was a spare HDD for the RAID, which needs to be the same make/model. Buying a second RAID was an easy way to do this...and in replacing those HDDs, the WD 2TB Greens were only $95 each, so it was cost-effective. The second reason was that I also wanted to have some "spare" 1TB drives to put another backup copy on, so as to create a 'free' off-site repository copy: this (non-RAID'ed) backup data copy has been made, reboxed, and brought it into work, where I've put it in my desk drawer (marked as "Personal Property") as a means of having a free "off-site" storage repository. I figure by the time I retire, the bandwidth required for uploading 500GB+ to a cloud-based repository will be more reasonable than today.

What basically remains for me is my HDD plan for when I upgrade my old home G5 PowerMac to a Mac Pro tower. I have a 2009 Mac Pro at work which gives me some insight ... right now, it isn't particularly optimized: 640GB OEM boot, 2x250GB RAID 1 ("free" spare drives) and a 2TB single. Presently, this machine is 'fast enough' that I've not worried about scratch disks or SSDs, particularly since I bumped it to 12GB of RAM. Frankly, I'm becoming more inclined to wait until OS 10.7 (Lion) adds TRIM support for SSDs before I think I really need to adopt them from a performance perspective. I think the near-term future for this machine is going to be to replace the small 250GB RAID1 with a larger RAID1.

For more performance, I've not done the detailed research, but I'm inclined to believe that the bigger bang for the buck would be to buy two small SSD's and RAID0 them for a scratch, versus a larger one to be used as a boot drive. I think its a question of faster boot & load time versus speeding up multiple Photoshop operations.


-hh

 

[snberk103]

...
When you're just starting out you'll take a lot of pictures, and I mean a lot. But over time once you learn your camera and photographic techniques that you like, you'll be able to get that 'perfect shot' with just one, so you won't be taking half as many pictures and that will take half as much space. (This is coming from a guy who took 7400 pictures in just two weeks in NYC and Washington DC).

That may be true, about taking fewer photos - but I've found that as the number of kept pictures goes down, the size of each image goes up as the camera gets better. I'm up to a 39 MP system now (and good heavens, I can't see any reason why I will every need anything bigger) that expands into TIF files of 200MB each, iirc. Looking at a serious expansion of storage, and of course the backups that go with that.