If you have a proper 3-2-1 backup strategy is a good option, but you need to be very careful with it, you need checksum verification software (like hedge) because you have bit rot problem (data corruption), also cloud backup with snapshots and versioning. A good storage backup is hard work and also requires constant verification that your archive is sound.
A modern scanner for 35mm and 120 film
-
H
- Thread starter moshin
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale $390 Nikon 500mm f4 P ais ed (I think that's all the labels?)
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale Tanar 50mm f2 ltm lens
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
For Sale NEW FUJIFILM Neopan Acros 100 Roll and Sheet Film Expired 2016-2019
- Started by opPaulT
-
For Sale NIKON NIKKOR 105mm f/2.5 Non Ai (MINT)
- Started by Acere
-
For Sale Transposing Frames for stereo photography, 45x107mm ("châssis alterneur")
- Started by Manual Camera
Forum statistics
If you have a proper 3-2-1 backup strategy is a good option, but you need to be very careful with it, you need checksum verification software (like hedge) because you have bit rot problem (data corruption), also cloud backup with snapshots and versioning. A good storage backup is hard work and also requires constant verification that your archive is sound.
Use proper file systems like BTRFS or ZFS.
That's alphabet soup to me, and I assume many others. I don't want to derail this thread further so I'll check for other threads on backup strategies. I think my strategy is sound but who knows.
So first, you need some level of redundancy under the filesystem-- ZFS includes that, I don't think BTRFS does-- and BTRFS still has a dedicated "warning" page for raid 5/6 because they can't figure out the write hole issue.
ZFS isn't bad, but it requires ECC memory to be as bulletproof as you think it is, and expanding a particular vdev is impossible the last I checked (apparently there is *FINALLY* a pull request in).
Of course, rebuilding most RAID's (or storage pools) requires stressing the ever-living crap out of the array, as you have to rebuild the entire array every time you replace a disk.
Personally, I'm using SNAPRaid which does on-demand parity snapshots, and can check/repair bit rot on a scheduled basis. Far lower overhead, much simpler management, and you can replace an individual disk without reading every single byte in the entire array.
I'd be very interested in a scanner that:
1) uses a CMOS or other high quality full frame (rather than line) sensor;
2) employs optics that are truly optimized for flat field performance at the magnifications required for the variety of different magnifications mandated by by a variety of different film formats;
3) includes a reliable, consistent output light source (like electronic flash) that provides continuous spectrum light of appropriate colour temperature;
4) includes filtration for the light source to match the light to the design specifications of the mask in C-41 negative materials;
5) provides useful, flexible and efficient provisions for handling sheet film, complete rolls, and short strips of roll film and mounted slides, in a manner that ensures film flatness;
6) includes provisions that prevent interference from ambient light, and help remove/minimize/eliminate dust;
6) includes software protocols that are exactly matched to the sensor and light sources employed - both for positive and negative films - and provides file output that suits commonly used image editing software - not just Adobe products; and
7) is small and attractive enough to have out in open view.
In order for the optics to be of high enough quality, I accept the fact that it may be necessary to have multiple lenses on a turret or sliding mount.
In order to maintain the consistency of light output and sensor response, it may be necessary to include calibration hardware and software.
Do you think it would bee more than $300.00?
That's a pretty tall list of requirements.
If you're scanning with a digital camera, actually, yes, you do. One of the issues is the camera's peak sensitivities do not match up with RA-4 paper or with whatever emulsion you happen to be shooting. The digital camera really more than anything is a very complex digital color mixing function, and it works a lot better when there are not holes in the spectrum feeding into the sensor. It's generally better to get as much spectrum as possible feeding the sensor. This probably is also why enlargers use halogen light. RA-4 paper probably responds better to full spectrum light than it would to super narrow beam wavelengths, or at least was designed to give best results with full spectrum light.
I should note, that using full spectrum light with a digital camera does not make it simpler. It would be far simpler to just have a monochrome sensor and three super narrow spectrum lights as then you could just set each of the lights spectrum to CIE XYZ coordinates in the code and then getting from raw scanner samples to XYZ is just a matrix conversion away. Once you're in XYZ it's trivial to convert to any other output color space.
+1
I could not have said it better myself.[/QUOTE]
+1 The same here. I have nothing against digital imaging, and in fact have an embarrassment of riches in digital land and am not a slouch in any way, shape, or form in doing digital imaging. Quite the opposite in fact. I don't post much digital work online simply because it's paid work and not *really* mine to post, but I shoot way more digital than I do film. Even though I dark room print as much as I can, it's primarily as a means of gaining knowledge simply because I feel it's more of a lost art than anything else.
I have *a lot* of insight into that and would be happy to discuss.
Halogen is a lousy example of of "continuous" light-- it's very low in the blue end of the spectrum, and heavily biased towards red. The higher CRI LED's have more blue (although they typically have a "notch" in the blue/green range) in their spectrum.
Here's a decent comparison:
Here's a decent comparison:
Wonder if the OP still reads this thread?
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
Halogen is continuous. That's what counts. No big valleys and not sudden peaks.Halogen is a lousy example of of "continuous" light-- it's very low in the blue end of the spectrum, and heavily biased towards red. The higher CRI LED's have more blue (although they typically have a "notch" in the blue/green range) in their spectrum.
Here's a decent comparison:
Look at the small notch at 690 nm. This is a smoothed graph and in reality that is a thin but high peak, that will wreak havoc with attempts to remove the orange mask.
Black body radiators has a special place in physics and colour science partly because they are so predictable and naturally smooth.
For those interested in a 5000 Kelvin light panel for negatives, I have a 6.3" x 8.7" Kaiser Slimlight Plano Light Panel I use for looking at negatives and chromes. I don't use it for scanning.
I did a test using my NEC Spectrograph II puck to check the Kevin of the panel at five location on the plane: at the four corners and in the middle both with battery and AC power. It's pretty close to 5000 Kelvin. Plano has a larger panel as well if you need it.
kaiser slimlite plano | B&H Photo Video (bhphotovideo.com)
I did a test using my NEC Spectrograph II puck to check the Kevin of the panel at five location on the plane: at the four corners and in the middle both with battery and AC power. It's pretty close to 5000 Kelvin. Plano has a larger panel as well if you need it.
kaiser slimlite plano | B&H Photo Video (bhphotovideo.com)
Attachments
filesystem on the NAS device is not relevant if corruption is caused by the host OS.
MattKing
Moderator
Intentionally so.
If you include the addendum in my subsequent post, it represents together all the things that I figure matter when it comes to digitization.
I included all that on the list, because I see so many posts that talk about one thing that matters, but imply that that thing makes all the difference.
If your host OS is causing corruption, you're just screwed.
In 25 years, I have had one file damaged while stored on an HDD. I recovered it from backup.
+1
I can't speak for BTRFS directly, but my main file server runs FreeBSD and ZFS and has done so since 2009. I've not lost a single file or image since then. I do of course keep multiple copies and backups on two different cloud providers of stuff I really don't want to lose. ZFS, especially on FreeBSD is easily one of the most bulletproof file systems I've had the pleasure of using. I've had hard drives fail, replaced components in the server en-masse, etc. and it just plain does what it's supposed to do.
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
That's only catastrophic if you never stress the storage system, then stress it to do a rebuild. I have a cron job that kicks off a whole file system verification routine on my ZFS system once a week. Every Wednesday at 3AM local time. Not doing that masks "soft failures", meaning the drive is effectively failed, you just don't know it yet because it's not being used enough to detect that it's got problems. But.... that will show up when you then suddenly exercise the system to rebuild the array. Want to avoid that? Do a ZFS scrub once a week when using consumer level drives. You can do it less often if you have higher grade drives, but still at least once a month. As soon as one of the drives starts to show data errors, replace it with the new in box spare drive you have sitting on the shelf, then go get a new drive to replace that one. Wash rinse repeat. Several years back, I went through a rash of drive failures where every drive in my array went bad over a ~3 month period. As soon as I saw the errors pop up in the email I get, I replaced the drive and ordered another one. Never lost a beat, or a file. The manufacturer ended up replacing my drives with bigger ones as they were ultimately identified as part of a faulty batch that got out the door.
Halogen is a lousy example of of "continuous" light-- it's very low in the blue end of the spectrum, and heavily biased towards red. The higher CRI LED's have more blue (although they typically have a "notch" in the blue/green range) in their spectrum.
Here's a decent comparison:
Let's be very clear. Full spectrum does not mean equal energy across the spectrum. Equal energy would be even better, but having at least some amount of light across the visible spectrum is generally better than not.
True. It's the total combination that matters, but, I would offer that you can 80% of the results with 20% of the stuff if you choose wisely.
True, but using an inappropriate file system as your primary storage to begin with makes any backups of data you do on that file system dubious. Let's be real here. Would you trust a backup made from a primary file system that was using a basic FAT (like FAT16 or FAT32)? I wouldn't. You have no easy way of knowing the data you put on the primary file system to begin with hasn't changed since you put it there. And you think you're safe because you backed it up? All you did was copy potentially wrong data. I'm a realist. Making sure you're not going to lose data due to failures is far from perfect, but there are some pretty basic and simple things you can do (like using an appropriate file system, etc.) that significantly reduces the odds of losing data. After all, the whole point of all of this is to mitigate losing data.
Statistically speaking, we're living in a computer simulation. Although, that's just another abuse of statistics. I'm certain memory corruption happens-- but not nearly on the scale advertised. Keep your thermals under control, keep your system clean, and the chances drop dramatically.
Statistics is not reality. Statistics is an approximation of reality, and people who forget that, are going to get a very unpleasant surprise at some point in their life.
I know-- empirical evidence that trumps theory is so annoying, isn't it? In that 25 years, I have transferred data from one system to another repeatedly, and occasionally, I do encounter bad sectors-- but that's what backups are for. The idea that a bit gets flipped in memory in transit without triggering any file integrity measures is interesting, but the number of real world examples (outside of multi-exabyte systems) is very, very small.
Finally, my NAS does a rolling scrub against parity data-- the chances of a file being altered, and the parity data being altered to match, is extremely low.
The chances of data being corrupted without my knowledge is very, very small.
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
Do you guys back up every image you take, or do you edit and delete your rejects? How many images do you have backed up right now? How many prints do you have saved?
-
- Old Gregg
- Deleted
For scanned images, I keep everything. I have the binders with the physical negatives, I scan to TIFF, and I copy (not move) the TIFF's to my NAS. I then edit the TIFF files, saving them in PSD (formerly) or .aphoto format (currently). I then export to JPG. And then I back all that up to the NAS.
At the moment, a fire in one corner of my house would wipe all that out.
For digital images, it's much the same, except I cull bad photos. I 'only' have about 10 thousand images on my NAS at the moment, going back to my Fuji MX1200 in 1999 (I basically gave up photography from about 2013 to 2019).
Edit and delete rejects. I don't have the space to keep every photo I've ever taken, and I don't have a small amount of space. I'd have to go through and count the total number of images, but I have images that were shot digitally going back to 1998. I have several Lightroom catalogs as I professionally shoot and also maintain a personal body of work that is separate from family stuff, and I regularly archive stuff off of hot nearline storage to free up space so I don't have a tally right off the bat. Professionally, I average a couple thousand keepers a month. Personally, a couple dozen a year. Family stuff, very variable. Usually at least a couple hundred keepers a month. I wouldn't be surprised if my total collection going back to 1998 was well over 200K images between professional, personal, and family images.
Last edited:
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |