I had thought about just asking one of my folks if i could hook up an old netbook and an external drive at their house and have it do my backups. Maybe I should do it. The software itself is just so easy and flexible.
I use crashplan's client and all my pcs backup to my home server. All my photos get backed up to a second disk that I keep off site. Their software works pretty flawlessly. I was going to use their cloud service but photo and video data would take months to seed.
I have been looking for a job in my field for a while. To some degree. I didn't help myself by getting a master of fine arts. I studied what I wanted, and I became a creative person and a damn good photographer. I freelance, but I really would like to do some commercial work. Trouble is, until I have that magic 5-8 years of experience, I am under-qualified for a lot of the jobs I see out there. On the other side of the coin, to pick up part time work that is more entry level, a lot of employers look at me like I'm nuts. Why would a guy with a master's want to work here? I wish an employer would look at my slight lack of experience as a chance to mold me into what they need. But whatever, it's all a waiting game, but I haven't had a steady salary or benefits for four years.
I have an aver NetBoot I got on clearance at target last year. I used it a lot Neil work got me an iPad. The NetBoot is not downstairs hooked up to a few USB drives happily receiving backups from my desktop and wife's computer and serving up music to my squeeze box. It's probably using a lot less power than the aging and full terastation it replaced. I had wanted to build a new NAS of some sort, but the NetBoot works fine, if not a little slow.
I am a photographer, and I need to use what i am used to and what works.... I used a Mac for a while and osx is nice, but I can't justify buying a Mac pro when I can build a solid pc for so much less. I like to upgrade my hardware myself. Linux has been in the back of my mind, and I have tried it a various points, but for photo editing it is half baked. I know him exists and it's a decent app, but I like adobe, photoshop works extremely well and so does lightroom. All their apps play well together. I need editing software that can be color calibrated and supports my raw files... Maybe something like that exists in linux, but I have tried Ubuntu studio, which is supposed to be for editing and content creation and it is not as nice as working with windows or osx and adobe apps. I don't want to spend time hunting down apps and making stuff work. I want to be out shooting and marketing.
I don't see it. I use facebook, but anymore I have limited what I share and post there. I have been getting a kick out of being friends with people I see. I used to check facebook a lot, but anymore it's kinda dull.
Kodak is dedicated to film for a while, they just realize that kodackrome's niche is pretty tiny. They did introduce Ektar, which is a pretty nice fine grain negative film. I just wish they sold it in 4x5 sheets. I am a big fan of ektachrome VS, can't beat the colors and resolution, too bad it's $5 every exposure I make. I look at it this way, film is pay as you go, and digital is pay it all up front. I could have bought a nice digital rig by now, but I would have had to get $10,000 pulled together. Instead I use a camera that is as old as my grandma and good ol' film.
I have ubuntu studio installed on my machine along side XP. I like the idea of opensource, and I want to try using it for a photo project. I know I will miss my standard adobe apps, and it will be a transition. I think the reason I want to do this is so that I ca work it into a not for profit photo course curriculum and a community project. It would fit the bill and run on cheap hardware. I have one problem I cannot overcome, and it's my own fault. I have a ntfs raid that I store all my photo data on (raid 1, sil soft raid card, sata) and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to mount and use the raid in ubuntu. Everything else has worked fine.... or I have been able to figure it out.
I want to like linux and I guess maybe my system is just weird, but I figured this sort of stuff would be easy to make work. I think for educational projects it is a good fit, it would make a small budget have a little wiggle room by eliminating the need for $500 worth of software. Ubuntu Studio is an interesting option and I want to try to exploit it.
Yeah, when I bought my phone, I asked for a monochrome phone with no camera... apparently those don't exist unless you use a tracfone. I want long battery life and small form factor. All the features I could have with this phone (mp3, video, gps) require service charges. I am a photographer, I usually have a way batter camera close at hand, I only use it to take embarrassing pictures of my drunk friends, and even then I would have rather just saved 50 bucks, the camera is not better than the first digi cam I owned. pffft. Iphones are pretty cool, but still, I typically just make calls.
I don't buy insurance for oil changes, but I do buy extended bumper to bumper warranties for unforeseeable defects. They typically pay for themselves somehow.
I bought a HP 5m with a duplexer from my university surplus for $35 bucks, it rocks, it prints 2 sided and I can do 2 or 4 pages a side too (but the print is tiny) It had a relatively low page count... like 43,000 so I bought it. The last one I bought had a count of 120,000 and it dies, but it was 20 bucks and I used the hell out of it. Toner carts are fairly cheap and they are good for 6500 pages... more than I print in years.
For photos I use an epson r1800, it is an ink hog but I am a photographer and the results are good. I would never run the 3rd party inks they mention. They had not profiles, and they did not test the prints for longevity, so of course their results were bad. Photo output requires profileed ink and paper for proper color accuracy. I have tried other companies who made pigmented inks for my machine and with the right media profiles I have had suitable results. Inkjets really aren't for printing lots of text in my opinion.
I remeber buying games for the pc that came on floppies and one of the first things they told you to do was to make backups of the installer disks. I failed to do that with a few games and was sad when one of my disks for theme park was corrupt... there were like 14 disks and it took me 30 mins or so to install it.
Yeah and even used books are becoming a thing of the past. I bought a text last semester that was a new edition and found out at the end of the semester that the professor had a new edition coming out for next year so they wouldn't buy back the 100 dollar text book. The professor that wrote it lives in town here, I am tempted to go shred it into her yard. How much information can she realyl changed in a 6 month period. It was a human sexuallity class. I can understand haveing a few new statistics her and there, but that is where a class web site should come into play. Sex is still in and out and dangerous if it's unprotected as far as I know. Maybe she got new tranny pics for the new edition. Meh.
No no no.....
There are tradeoffs. Sure there is no physical negative, but negatives are fickle beings within themselves. I shoot film and digital regularly. Some shoots aren't worth using film, and on another side of the coin, I think digital stinks for black and white. As far as ownership of data, if you don't like to have raw files, you can convert them, to a atandard like adobe's digital negative format, or shoot jpeg(if you like to be locked into lossy crappy files)
Raw is different from company to company becasue the ccd or cmos ( or favian... etc) is different and the raw file is just the color gamut and luminosity recoded by the sensor, along with the data from the camer itself (shutter speed, f/stop, flash etc.) I know nikon has had a hitch in one of their recent formats, but it does not benifit the company to "own" your work andymore than it would benfit kodak or ilford to 'own' your negatives.
Digital photography is not the end all solution for photos, and neither is film. they both have distict advantages. I still reach for a large format camera if I want a perfectly crisp image with lots of resolution, a 4x5 will out do a dslr hands down, but if I want a image fast without all the darkroom work, a digital is the way to go.
This raw repository is a great idea, but I think it's silly to get all concerned with archivability. If your work is worth preserving, someone will. If you are shooting raw from a camera like a canon or a nikon, I am sure there will be utilities to open these files, hell even photoshops supports most of them. Especially when the average photographer's upgrade path is about 5 years or so.... or more, I have a camera that is as old as my grandma.
Slashdot Mirror
I had thought about just asking one of my folks if i could hook up an old netbook and an external drive at their house and have it do my backups. Maybe I should do it. The software itself is just so easy and flexible.
I use crashplan's client and all my pcs backup to my home server. All my photos get backed up to a second disk that I keep off site. Their software works pretty flawlessly. I was going to use their cloud service but photo and video data would take months to seed.
I have been looking for a job in my field for a while. To some degree. I didn't help myself by getting a master of fine arts. I studied what I wanted, and I became a creative person and a damn good photographer. I freelance, but I really would like to do some commercial work. Trouble is, until I have that magic 5-8 years of experience, I am under-qualified for a lot of the jobs I see out there. On the other side of the coin, to pick up part time work that is more entry level, a lot of employers look at me like I'm nuts. Why would a guy with a master's want to work here? I wish an employer would look at my slight lack of experience as a chance to mold me into what they need. But whatever, it's all a waiting game, but I haven't had a steady salary or benefits for four years.
Jesus... Typos.... Can you tell I typed this on an iPad.? That's the one thing I miss about my little netbook....
I have an aver NetBoot I got on clearance at target last year. I used it a lot Neil work got me an iPad. The NetBoot is not downstairs hooked up to a few USB drives happily receiving backups from my desktop and wife's computer and serving up music to my squeeze box. It's probably using a lot less power than the aging and full terastation it replaced. I had wanted to build a new NAS of some sort, but the NetBoot works fine, if not a little slow.
I am a photographer, and I need to use what i am used to and what works.... I used a Mac for a while and osx is nice, but I can't justify buying a Mac pro when I can build a solid pc for so much less. I like to upgrade my hardware myself. Linux has been in the back of my mind, and I have tried it a various points, but for photo editing it is half baked. I know him exists and it's a decent app, but I like adobe, photoshop works extremely well and so does lightroom. All their apps play well together. I need editing software that can be color calibrated and supports my raw files... Maybe something like that exists in linux, but I have tried Ubuntu studio, which is supposed to be for editing and content creation and it is not as nice as working with windows or osx and adobe apps. I don't want to spend time hunting down apps and making stuff work. I want to be out shooting and marketing.
I don't see it. I use facebook, but anymore I have limited what I share and post there. I have been getting a kick out of being friends with people I see. I used to check facebook a lot, but anymore it's kinda dull.
and.... B-17 bomber!
wow, my lab only runs e-6 and c-41 twice a week now, but they do any size film from 8x10 to 110..... http://www.burne.com/
Kodak is dedicated to film for a while, they just realize that kodackrome's niche is pretty tiny. They did introduce Ektar, which is a pretty nice fine grain negative film. I just wish they sold it in 4x5 sheets. I am a big fan of ektachrome VS, can't beat the colors and resolution, too bad it's $5 every exposure I make. I look at it this way, film is pay as you go, and digital is pay it all up front. I could have bought a nice digital rig by now, but I would have had to get $10,000 pulled together. Instead I use a camera that is as old as my grandma and good ol' film.
I have ubuntu studio installed on my machine along side XP. I like the idea of opensource, and I want to try using it for a photo project. I know I will miss my standard adobe apps, and it will be a transition. I think the reason I want to do this is so that I ca work it into a not for profit photo course curriculum and a community project. It would fit the bill and run on cheap hardware. I have one problem I cannot overcome, and it's my own fault. I have a ntfs raid that I store all my photo data on (raid 1, sil soft raid card, sata) and I cannot for the life of me figure out how to mount and use the raid in ubuntu. Everything else has worked fine.... or I have been able to figure it out. I want to like linux and I guess maybe my system is just weird, but I figured this sort of stuff would be easy to make work. I think for educational projects it is a good fit, it would make a small budget have a little wiggle room by eliminating the need for $500 worth of software. Ubuntu Studio is an interesting option and I want to try to exploit it.
Yeah, when I bought my phone, I asked for a monochrome phone with no camera... apparently those don't exist unless you use a tracfone. I want long battery life and small form factor. All the features I could have with this phone (mp3, video, gps) require service charges. I am a photographer, I usually have a way batter camera close at hand, I only use it to take embarrassing pictures of my drunk friends, and even then I would have rather just saved 50 bucks, the camera is not better than the first digi cam I owned. pffft. Iphones are pretty cool, but still, I typically just make calls.
I don't buy insurance for oil changes, but I do buy extended bumper to bumper warranties for unforeseeable defects. They typically pay for themselves somehow.
My favorite games for Intellevision were B-17 bomber with the voice module, and my dad and I used to play Utopia as well. Good times.
I bought a HP 5m with a duplexer from my university surplus for $35 bucks, it rocks, it prints 2 sided and I can do 2 or 4 pages a side too (but the print is tiny) It had a relatively low page count... like 43,000 so I bought it. The last one I bought had a count of 120,000 and it dies, but it was 20 bucks and I used the hell out of it. Toner carts are fairly cheap and they are good for 6500 pages... more than I print in years.
For photos I use an epson r1800, it is an ink hog but I am a photographer and the results are good. I would never run the 3rd party inks they mention. They had not profiles, and they did not test the prints for longevity, so of course their results were bad. Photo output requires profileed ink and paper for proper color accuracy. I have tried other companies who made pigmented inks for my machine and with the right media profiles I have had suitable results. Inkjets really aren't for printing lots of text in my opinion.
I remeber buying games for the pc that came on floppies and one of the first things they told you to do was to make backups of the installer disks. I failed to do that with a few games and was sad when one of my disks for theme park was corrupt... there were like 14 disks and it took me 30 mins or so to install it.
Yeah and even used books are becoming a thing of the past. I bought a text last semester that was a new edition and found out at the end of the semester that the professor had a new edition coming out for next year so they wouldn't buy back the 100 dollar text book. The professor that wrote it lives in town here, I am tempted to go shred it into her yard. How much information can she realyl changed in a 6 month period. It was a human sexuallity class. I can understand haveing a few new statistics her and there, but that is where a class web site should come into play. Sex is still in and out and dangerous if it's unprotected as far as I know. Maybe she got new tranny pics for the new edition. Meh.
No no no..... There are tradeoffs. Sure there is no physical negative, but negatives are fickle beings within themselves. I shoot film and digital regularly. Some shoots aren't worth using film, and on another side of the coin, I think digital stinks for black and white. As far as ownership of data, if you don't like to have raw files, you can convert them, to a atandard like adobe's digital negative format, or shoot jpeg(if you like to be locked into lossy crappy files) Raw is different from company to company becasue the ccd or cmos ( or favian... etc) is different and the raw file is just the color gamut and luminosity recoded by the sensor, along with the data from the camer itself (shutter speed, f/stop, flash etc.) I know nikon has had a hitch in one of their recent formats, but it does not benifit the company to "own" your work andymore than it would benfit kodak or ilford to 'own' your negatives. Digital photography is not the end all solution for photos, and neither is film. they both have distict advantages. I still reach for a large format camera if I want a perfectly crisp image with lots of resolution, a 4x5 will out do a dslr hands down, but if I want a image fast without all the darkroom work, a digital is the way to go. This raw repository is a great idea, but I think it's silly to get all concerned with archivability. If your work is worth preserving, someone will. If you are shooting raw from a camera like a canon or a nikon, I am sure there will be utilities to open these files, hell even photoshops supports most of them. Especially when the average photographer's upgrade path is about 5 years or so.... or more, I have a camera that is as old as my grandma.