Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: John Swearingen on January 06, 2007, 05:13:29 pm

Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 06, 2007, 05:13:29 pm
I'm going to Tibet for a month this summer, in areas where electricity, much less computers, will be hard to find. I will have to rely on what I take with me for storage and back-up of images.  I will need to travel light--heavy gear gets REALLY heavy when you are gasping for air!

I'm a little wary of bringing a hard-drive device, such as the Epson P-4000.  The roads are rough, and a broken hard-drive would be a disaster.  Also, I've heard that hard-drives may have trouble at high altitudes, since they run on a cushion of air.

I've begun looking at solid state devices that would work in the field.  The iPod, with a card reader, seems an easy choice: 80 gigs, tough and reliable.  Though it's not great for handling images, my primary interest is in downloading my flash cards; the trip will be very busy, and managing of the images will come after my return.   One disadvantage may be speed...the iPod and card reader would be relatively slow.

Another disadvantage is that there would be no way to make a second or third back-up.  If the iPod were lost, stolen or malfunctioned, everything would be gone.

Does anyone have suggestions?

Thanks,
John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John.Murray on January 06, 2007, 05:36:26 pm
If you are considering an 80GB solution - why not just carry 20 4GB or 10 8GB cards?  I know this doesn't address your backup concern, but a failure of one card would obviously not affect the others.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 06, 2007, 05:50:48 pm
Quote
If you are considering an 80GB solution - why not just carry 20 4GB or 10 8GB cards?  I know this doesn't address your backup concern, but a failure of one card would obviously not affect the others.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94201\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


This does give a level of security and comfort that I find appealing.  

They would be an extra expense (I was looking forward to a new iPod to keep after the trip), but if I decide that I don't need to keep all the cards cards, they have a good resale value and would be easy to unload.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Box Brownie on January 06, 2007, 05:57:20 pm
Is the iPod really solid state @ 80GB, I have not researched it but I was under the impression they had one of the small HDD in them.  If so then altitude would IMHO be a 'no-no'.

Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 06, 2007, 05:58:32 pm
I'm going to answer my own question, somewhat.  Researching on Amazon the iPod/Belkin card reader combination for image storage, I found several reviews that commented that  the download time is about three times slower than a usb/laptop, acceptable for the average shooter's smaller images, but perhaps painful when shooting images of 13 megs each.  

More important for my trip, the downloading appears to drain batteries very quickly, for both the card reader and the iPod--about 1 gig will exhaust the iPod.  During my last visit it was sometimes 4-5 days between times when I could plug in a charger, so this is a big consideration.  It would be safer to have a unit that runs on regular batteries, which can be carried.

But what's that unit?
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 06, 2007, 06:03:41 pm
Quote
Is the iPod really solid state @ 80GB, I have not researched it but I was under the impression they had one of the small HDD in them.  If so then altitude would IMHO be a 'no-no'.


[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94208\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

AH!! you're right.  The nano's use a flash drive, but have only 8 gigs of storage. The iPod is a hard drive.

Well...what to do?  
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Box Brownie on January 06, 2007, 06:15:07 pm
Sounds like your only option is to shell out big time for more CF cards.

Just out of interest how do you charge the camera batteries, I have read of solar power supplies but those that are any good seem to cost a heck of lot.

Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Gary Brown on January 06, 2007, 06:37:51 pm
Perhaps one of those portable CD burner gadgets that can copy from memory cards, would work at those altitudes.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 06, 2007, 07:56:52 pm
Quick googling claims that HDDs without specially designed pressurized enclosures work up to 3000m. If you're gonna stay higher than that (!) for extended periods, I guess the only sure-fire way is to invest in a stack of CF cards and a CF copier (is there such a beast?). But if not, portable HDDs are the way to go. You shouldn't worry about dropping them as HDDs withstand hundreds of Gs (non-operational), so the first thing to break would be the housing and compression damage (stepping on it). If it does just fall and break, your HDD is most probably still readable.

I just got a HyperDrive SPACE for backing up HDDs and it has a solid metal housing. Haven't dropped it yet nor do I know of any serious ruggedness testing for portable HDDs, though.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Iwill on January 06, 2007, 10:49:28 pm
There is one technology that is really suited for just what you're going to do --
it's called FILM!
 
No need for hard drives, chargers, laptops, cd or dvd burners, flash cards, ipods (except for playing tunes, of course!), or tricky sensor cleaning, either.  Granted, you have to carry a lot of rolls with you, but that's all.  And you could buy all of the film and processing for a whole lot less than the cost of 20 4GB flash cards, too.  Seriously, for an expedition like you are planning, going into one of the most remote locations in the world, film is really a viable option.  It would solve a lot of your problems.

d:^)

Irv Williams
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: mtselman on January 06, 2007, 11:11:38 pm
John,

I do not think you need to worry too much about altitude unless you are going to extremes (like 7000-8000m). Hard drives work just fine at altitudes of 4000m, which is what most of Tibetan plateau is.
I do a lot of mountain climbing and have traveled extensively at high altitudes. There are some cities: Leh in Ladakh (India), La Paz in Bolivia, which are at around 4000m. There are hundreds of internet cafes and other computer equipment there with old and new hard drives which just work.
As you noticed yourself, iPod uses a hard-drive as well, (and has been used by climbers up to 7-8000meters). I would not go for iPod as download times are slow. Get a dedicated device. I'm using Xs-Drive, but there are more modern ones on the market now. Just pad it well for travel and take extra batteries. Another option, if you are traveling at high altitude in mostly good weather is to take a small portable solar batery with you. You can use it to charge many devices. Do a research. I saw people carying them on tops of their packs in Nepal and other places.
Multiple cards do have an advantage of spreading the risk, but also increase the probability that at least one of them may fail, or may get lost/mishandled.

Tibet is on my list of places to visit. Maybe this summer as well...

  --Misha
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: mtselman on January 07, 2007, 09:04:33 am
Quote
There is one technology that is really suited for just what you're going to do --
it's called FILM!
 
No need for hard drives, chargers, laptops, cd or dvd burners, flash cards, ipods (except for playing tunes, of course!), or tricky sensor cleaning, either.  Granted, you have to carry a lot of rolls with you, but that's all.  And you could buy all of the film and processing for a whole lot less than the cost of 20 4GB flash cards, too.  Seriously, for an expedition like you are planning, going into one of the most remote locations in the world, film is really a viable option.  It would solve a lot of your problems.

d:^)

Irv Williams
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94249\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Interesting point, which made me curious how much film you'd need to carry. Let's see  - he is planning on filling up 80GB with 13MB images. That gives us somewhere around 6000 exposures. Taken in 36 frame rolls that equates to almost 170 rolls of film. Even divided by half, (assuming he does not really need 80GB) we are left with 85 rolls.
I believe, the weight, the bulk and the cost of buying/processing/scanning 85 rolls will all exceed the weight, the bulk and the cost of the electronic gadgets he'd need to carry for digital.
One can argue that you are more careful with taking film shots than with digital, so not so many rolls are needed, but that would be a slippery discussion ground as there are plenty of arguments from both sides.

Just a thought....  

  --Misha

PS. Another advantage of digital in the regions like Tibet: Often locals are afraid/shy of the camera and you have to respect their privacy. What I found to work in these cases is taking a photo of some third subject, or a mountain or even of myself and showing them the image on the LCD. Then they get interested, they want to pose and even to snap their own picture with your camera. Great conversation starter.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Iwill on January 08, 2007, 12:51:33 am
Quote
Interesting point, which made me curious how much film you'd need to carry. Let's see  - he is planning on filling up 80GB with 13MB images. That gives us somewhere around 6000 exposures. Taken in 36 frame rolls that equates to almost 170 rolls of film. Even divided by half, (assuming he does not really need 80GB) we are left with 85 rolls.
I believe, the weight, the bulk and the cost of buying/processing/scanning 85 rolls will all exceed the weight, the bulk and the cost of the electronic gadgets he'd need to
carry for digital.
One can argue that you are more careful with taking film shots than with digital, so not so many rolls are needed, but that would be a slippery discussion ground as there are plenty of arguments from both sides.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94298\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Misha - I agree that going for 85 rolls of film or 40 GB is a good compromise on this planning exercise, so let's see how that might work out in terms of cost, bulk and weight for film compared to the electronics he'd have to carry, along with the safety factors of splitting up the storage.

I've taken all prices from the current web pages at B&H Photo:

THE FILM SOLUTION:

Film:  Fujifilm 135 36 exp. Velvia 100 @$5.29 ea. x 85 rolls = $449.65
Processing:  Fujifilm slide processing mailer @$4.49 ea. x 85 mailers = $381.65
Total cost of film and processing for 85 rolls of 36 exp. = $831.30

Weight of 36 exp. film roll = 1 oz. x 85 rolls = 85 oz. = 5.3 lbs.

Size of 35mm film roll = 1.25" x 1.25" x 2" = 3.125 cu. in / roll
3.125 cu. in. x 85 rolls = 265.6 cu. in. = 0.15 cu. ft. = approx. 4" x 6" x11"


ELECTRONIC SOLUTION 1:

Sandisk 4 GB Extreme III Compact Flash card = $122.95 x 10 cards = $1,229.50

Weight of 10 compact flash cards = negligible.

Size of 10 compact flash cards = negligible.

So the compact flash card solution costs about $400 more than film, but has the least weight and least storage size, and requires nothing more to carry.


ELECTRONIC SOLUTION 2:

Epson P-5000 portable storage viewer = $679.95
Extra battery for above = 59.95
Total for P-5000 plus extra battery = $739.90

Weight of viewer plus charger plus extra battery = approx. 1.75 lbs.

Size of viewer plus charger plus extra battery = approx 96 cu. in.
= approx. 0.05 cu. ft. = approx. 4" x4" x 6"  

So the P-5000 solution costs about $50 less than the film, weighs about 1/3 as much and takes up about 1/3 the space of film, but weighs more and takes up more space than the flash cards.

Another point for the electronic solutions is that you can continue to reuse both of them for future shooting, while the film cannot be reused.

On the other hand, since safety factors are a concern for these once-in-a-lifetime shots, let's look at redundancy.  If one of our storage units is lost or damaged, we would lose one roll out of the 85 rolls of film, and a little over 1% of our shots would be lost.  If one of the 4 GB compact flash cards were lost or damaged, then we would lose 10% of our shots.  If the Epson P-5000 viewer were to suffer a catastrophe, then we would lose all (or almost all) of our shots.  So in this case, the film would be the safest, the compact flash cards the next safest and the the Epson P-5000 viewer the riskiest.

Since John's expressed concerns were safety for his images and light weight and small size for him to carry, I would have to say that carrying 10 each 4 GB compact flash cards seems to be the best of the three solutions considered here.  The cards would add virtually no weight or bulk for the photographer, would not risk the loss of too many shots if one card were lost (although 10% would hurt!), and could easily be sold afterward to recoup most of their initial cost.

The choice would be more difficult between film and the Epson P-5000 storage viewer.  The Epson is a bit cheaper, and is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the film.  However, if it fails up there, everything on it is lost, and no further transfers can be done from the camera card, so most of the shots of the trip would be lost.  Considering the cost and time and effort of this trip, that risk seems to be higher than I would like to take without secondary backup, which would add more cost, weight, bulk, etc.  If I had to choose between the two, I'd take the film.

Now we haven't looked at how many camera batteries he'd have to take in order to shoot for a week between recharging, but I believe that that would be doable.  A film camera does have the advantage of shooting way more than 85 rolls on one battery, and if the expedition were going to go for a month without possibility of recharging, then digital might not be practical.  In this case, with only a week between charging, a few extra batteries would probably do the trick.

I've learned that my initial reaction (film is the answer here) doesn't actually turn out to be true for this situation.  The electronic solution with compact flash cards for the storage medium seem to have a definite advantage over film.

I also agree that digital has a clear advantage as an icebreaker; film simply can't do that (unless you take a Polaroid along!), and that can have great advantages for getting the kind of pictures you want.

Irv
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 08, 2007, 09:14:31 am
Quote
There is one technology that is really suited for just what you're going to do --
it's called FILM!
 
d:^)

Irv Williams
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94249\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I will bring my film body and quite a few rolls, as a back up, and because I like film.  My last visit I shot film.  However, in the unusual conditions I will be shooting in, I very much liike the instant feedback of digital, so that I can make corrections in the field.  I also like the ability to take lots of pictures at little cost.  Last visit, I had to budget my shots more than I would like--I'll be away for a month.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 08, 2007, 09:22:29 am
Quote
I've learned that my initial reaction (film is the answer here) doesn't actually turn out to be true for this situation.  The electronic solution with compact flash cards for the storage medium seem to have a definite advantage over film.

I also agree that digital has a clear advantage as an icebreaker; film simply can't do that (unless you take a Polaroid along!), and that can have great advantages for getting the kind of pictures you want.
Irv
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I by and large am agreeing with your conclusions.  A viewer like the Giga Vu, would be very popular.  Last visit, I had a pocket digital camera, and it was a big hit!

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 08, 2007, 09:35:09 am
Quote
John,

I do not think you need to worry too much about altitude unless you are going to extremes (like 7000-8000m). Hard drives work just fine at altitudes of 4000m, which is what most of Tibetan plateau is. Another option, if you are traveling at high altitude in mostly good weather is to take a small portable solar batery with you. You can use it to charge many devices.
  --Misha
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94252\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the reassurance.  I think that I needn't worry too much about a HD device, I'll mostly be around 4-5000m.

The solar might be a good option, and I'll research that.  Also making friends with our drivers, to use their car chargers.  This might work, but it's not reliable, as they won't be with us all the time.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dobson on January 08, 2007, 04:14:36 pm
Thanks for the cost analysis of film/digital storage. Do remember that, unlike film, digital is reusable. If the photographer goes on two trips, the cost of digital is slashed in half compared to film. Just something to keep in mind.

Phillip
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Hank on January 08, 2007, 04:36:04 pm
I tried the iPod/Belkin route.  Gotta say it gave me wicked pleasure to lay the Belkin unit on the ground and stomp it, then dump in the trash.  My ears love the iPod, and my soul is happy with the death of the Belkin.

Haven't looked into it, but if you need to get around hard drives my impulse would be to carefully evaluate the portable CD burner option.  It's pure speculation on my part, but with the growing acceptability and performance of SD cards, I'd hate to have 80 gb additional of CF cards two or three years from now.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 08, 2007, 04:54:36 pm
Quote
Haven't looked into it, but if you need to get around hard drives my impulse would be to carefully evaluate the portable CD burner option.  It's pure speculation on my part, but with the growing acceptability and performance of SD cards, I'd hate to have 80 gb additional of CF cards two or three years from now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94611\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You need a laptop with a portable CD/DVD buner which brings the price and especially weight up considerably compared to portable HDDs.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Box Brownie on January 08, 2007, 05:01:17 pm
Quote
You need a laptop with a portable CD/DVD buner which brings the price and especially weight up considerably compared to portable HDDs.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94616\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not quite right!

There are or were standalone portable CD burners with DVD burners due sometime during 2006.

I have not looked into this recently but it was the issue of verification if it was a function maing the process very slow an also like the portable HDD storage devices the question of battery life.

HTH
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: mtselman on January 08, 2007, 05:24:06 pm
Quote
Misha - I agree that going for 85 rolls of film or 40 GB is a good compromise on this planning exercise, so let's see how that might work out in terms of cost, bulk and weight for film compared to the electronics he'd have to carry, along with the safety factors of splitting up the storage.
.......

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



Irv,

Excellent analysis!!!
Just a few points:

As John is taking his trip in the summer, not right now, it is likely that the cost of CF cards by that time will be at least 30% less, or even better, which will probably make CF route to be also the cheapest solution.
(for example, a year ago I bought a 2GB card for close to $200 and a few days ago bought exactly the same for under $40)
So, John, if you are going to buy CF cards or any other electronics - do that a month before the trip, not right now.
If following a HardDrive solution, for extra security I would buy a cheaper (no-picture-preview) model (they are around $200 for an 80GB unit) as a back up of the primary and would back-up onto it from the primary when near electricity sources. Those are also lighter (around 1/2lb). It can also be used if the main one fails during the trip.
Surprisingly, though, calculations indeed lead to the CF solution as optimal, while I expected that HD solution to be the right one. That will be even more so, as price/GB for CF storage continues to fall.

  --Misha
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 08, 2007, 05:52:41 pm
Quote
Surprisingly, though, calculations indeed lead to the CF solution as optimal, while I expected that HD solution to be the right one. That will be even more so, as price/GB for CF storage continues to fall.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94623\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Price =! optimal (necessarily). With an all-CF option you don't get redundant backups (unless you have a CF copier, ie. a laptop). With portable HDDs this is an option. And I wouldn't take an extended trip without having 2 copies of every picture in two different locations - one in my backpack, one in my friend's.

Oh, one thing that hasn't been mentioned is mailing your photos to yourself. I don't remember where I read about it - coudl've been on LL - but some pro mails one set of backups to himself and keeps the other copies on him. This way redundancy is increased and the possibility of losing all your shots minimized.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Jonathan Wienke on January 08, 2007, 07:12:56 pm
CF cards are more durable than rolls of film. Crack the case on a CF card, and it will likely still work just fine. Crack the case on a roll of film, and it is probably ruined. CF cards have survived being laundered, which film would not likely tolerate. And most decent DSLRs can beat the pants off of 35mm film anyway, so why cripple yourself with inferior image quality and a more fragile medium? If a CF card dies you lose more shots than damaging a roll of film, but CF is so much more durable and damage-resistant that overall you're safer with CF than with film. It's just like flying vs auto travel; when a plane crashes more people die than in an auto wreck, but overall you're much safer flying than driving.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: stever on January 08, 2007, 09:00:15 pm
i believe that CF cards for 100% of the expected photo requirement is the reliable way to go - disk drives are fundamentally not all that reliable - if you want to re-use the CF cards, then you need 2 hard drives (which also means downloading each card twice)

even with 100% CF, a professional photographer would demand a second backup (and so would i considering the expense and time put into the trip) - for that i'd recommend the card backup drive that was recently discussed in another thread (whose name i can't remember) as it uses AA batteries and appears to be lighter and more rugged (without the big, fragile screen of the Epson) and presumably doesn't re-number you're images like the epson.  The Epson has a heavy, bulky power supply and short battery life with a battery that can only be re-charged in the unit (at least at the time i bought mine)

you don't say what equipment you're using, but i'd suggest a battery grip so you can use re-chargeable and primary AA cells -- you can calculate and test how long the AAs will last, but i'd guess about 1000 images for a set if you're not looking at the display all the time -- you may decide just to pack AAs and dispense with the charger depending on the expected electricity availability -- the size and weight of a AC/12V charger is not inconsequential, and relying on and screwing around with a solar re-charger does not sound like a pleasant low-risk proposition

what is your backup camera - if you're not taking another body (and at least one backup lens) i'd recommend a point-and-shoot that uses AA cells and CF cards (which today probably means a used camera)
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 08, 2007, 11:40:11 pm
The concensus seems to be that a safe bet would include multiple CF's along with a HD backup device.  This would keep down weight and bulk, and assure at least two copies.  The HD backup can be carried by a friend, as well, so spread the risk.

I'll have a Canon 5D, and will also bring some film and my film body, and a point/shoot digital.

The question now is finding a reasonable solution to batteries.  The HD backup can be done whenever electricity is available and/or as long as batteries are good.  A HD backup that takes AA batteries would certainly be an advantage.

It seems that making sure that the 5D has enough batteries to last a week would be important.  Does anyone have experience with this?  I'm making the switch to digital just on this trip, so I don't have a clear idea of what the 5D will require.

Thanks for all your comments and experience so far!

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: kbolin on January 09, 2007, 12:19:55 am
Quote
The question now is finding a reasonable solution to batteries. The HD backup can be done whenever electricity is available and/or as long as batteries are good. A HD backup that takes AA batteries would certainly be an advantage.

Why not buy a simple roll-up solar panel.  You can lay it out in the sun run a cord into your tent (or whatever) and recharge your batteries.  My 120Gb Hyperdrive came with a 12V charger.... rewire it so it will plug into your solar panel and voila... power!  It will be a show recharge... but a recharge non the less.

Kelly
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 09, 2007, 12:38:19 am
Quote
Why not buy a simple roll-up solar panel.  You can lay it out in the sun run a cord into your tent (or whatever) and recharge your batteries.  My 120Gb Hyperdrive came with a 12V charger.... rewire it so it will plug into your solar panel and voila... power!  It will be a show recharge... but a recharge non the less.

Kelly
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94704\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My HyperDrive SPACE came with the car charger and a AA battery pack, so I don't have to rely on the internal li-ion. I'm sure there are other portable HDDs with similarly flexible power options.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: stever on January 09, 2007, 12:40:36 am
i'd suggest that if it doesn't break the budget, a digital rebel body with BG should replace the film body (and film) and the point & shoot -- this provides the 1.6x crop where appropriate with a 100% digital record -- i started out with a combination of film and digital resulting in a huge editing mess

what lenses are you planning to take?

spend plenty of time testing equipment, and it there's a question about battery life, just shoot however many images are necessary to to satisfy yourself

practice handheld panoramas with panorama maker - it can be done - i've learned to put my hand in front of the lens at the begining and end to eliminate confusion

in short, i'm jealous, as i aborted a trip in 2001 over political concerns and am not sure my wife will sign up to another one
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Iwill on January 09, 2007, 01:05:25 am
Quote
The concensus seems to be that a safe bet would include multiple CF's along with a HD backup device.  This would keep down weight and bulk, and assure at least two copies.  The HD backup can be carried by a friend, as well, so spread the risk.

I'll have a Canon 5D, and will also bring some film and my film body, and a point/shoot digital.

The question now is finding a reasonable solution to batteries.  The HD backup can be done whenever electricity is available and/or as long as batteries are good.  A HD backup that takes AA batteries would certainly be an advantage.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=94703\")

John, I did some web searching for a card backup drive like the one that Stever mentioned and found what looks like a beauty.  It provides the kind of battery solution that you're looking for.  The device is called the Hyperdrive Space, and it is made for backing up any and all camera memory cards.  It is small, light and rugged.  It backs up at the rate of 1GB per minute, has an internal lithium battery that will copy 100GB on a charge, has an accessory external battery holder for 4 AA batteries, has lots of data safeguards, and the 100GB capacity model costs $279.  The website for this device is at:
               
Hyperdrive Space

Home page:
[a href=\"http://www.hypershop.com/shop/index.php]http://www.hypershop.com/shop/index.php[/url]

Full Description:
http://www.hypershop.com/shop/information.php?info_id=11 (http://www.hypershop.com/shop/information.php?info_id=11)

Models and cost:
http://www.hypershop.com/shop/index.php?cPath=27 (http://www.hypershop.com/shop/index.php?cPath=27)

Testimonials:
http://www.hypershop.com/shop/information.php?info_id=7 (http://www.hypershop.com/shop/information.php?info_id=7)

Review (of previous model HD-80):
http://goeurope.about.com/od/photographyti...rdrive_HD80.htm (http://goeurope.about.com/od/photographytips/gr/hyperdrive_HD80.htm)

I can't help but be enthusiastic about the specs on this backup drive.  It would actually run all the backups you need for your entire trip on one charge of its internal battery, with charge and storage space to spare, but if you also took the AA battery holder and a couple of sets of AA batteries, you'd have excellent spare capacity without the need for any recharging on the trip.

I haven't used this drive, so I can't speak to its performance.  Perhaps someone else on this forum has used it and can comment.

Irv
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 09, 2007, 10:31:01 am
Quote
John, I did some web searching for a card backup drive like the one that Stever mentioned and found what looks like a beauty.  It provides the kind of battery solution that you're looking for.  The device is called the Hyperdrive Space, and it is made for backing up any and all camera memory cards.  It is small, light and rugged.  It backs up at the rate of 1GB per minute, has an internal lithium battery that will copy 100GB on a charge, has an accessory external battery holder for 4 AA batteries, has lots of data safeguards, and the 100GB capacity model costs $279.  The website for this device is at:
...
I haven't used this drive, so I can't speak to its performance.  Perhaps someone else on this forum has used it and can comment.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94710\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I got a HyperDrive SPACE about a month ago and love it. Your spec list above is a good list of the best features. Mine came with a promotional battery pack and a car charger, I think you have to pay extra for them now. I purchased the casing only and bought and installed a 2.5" 160GB HDD myself - it was very easy and _much_ cheaper than buying the casing with the drive from HyperDrive.

Instructions are quite rudimentary but workable. The backlit screen is good but the UI is a bit clunky. It works fine after you get used to it, though. The screen is _not_ for viewing, but I've never seen the need for a viewing screen on a portable HDD as SPACE has file integrity verification which is much more reliable than eyeballing the file. Casing is metal and reasonably rugged. There are no weather seals, though. I've been in contact with customer support and they are helpful, courteous and reply within 24 hours.

The best factors are the incredibly long battery life and different verification schemes. You can choose no verification, partial (checks every few files) or full. It copies my Sandisk Ultra II 2GB card in about 2 minutes without verification, a bit over 11 mins with full verification. All you have to do is slap in the card and it does its thing without a press of a button - if so needed.

Oh, and it also functions as an external HDD. I partitioned mine in two partitions, one for CF backups and one for computer use. HyperDrive can access both multiple partitions as long as they have been formatted with FAT32.

In the end, the only minor complaints I have is the clunky UI and lack of weather sealing. Thankfully you don't need to use the UI for almost anything after setting it up - card copying is automatic after insertion and you have to push just one button after attaching the USB cable to a computer. Also, I don't know how effective weather sealing would be in a gadget that has several large ports for different memory cards.

Somebody on this board complained that they bent pins in their HyperDrive's (I don't remember which of their models) CF reader slot and had it returned. I haven't had that problem but I try to be careful as the pin-bending seems to be a problem with cameras as well.

SPACE does everything their advertising material claims and it does it well. I spent a lot of time studying different portable HDDs, and SPACE is, IMO, the optimal mix of functionality, size and price. Next time I take an extended photo trip I'm going to buy another one for double backups.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Iwill on January 09, 2007, 11:49:53 pm
Quote
SPACE does everything their advertising material claims and it does it well. I spent a lot of time studying different portable HDDs, and SPACE is, IMO, the optimal mix of functionality, size and price. Next time I take an extended photo trip I'm going to buy another one for double backups.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94759\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Feppe, thanks very much for giving us your experience as a user of the Hyperdrive Space.  This is definitely what I will purchase for my next photo trip.

Irv
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 10, 2007, 11:59:23 am
Quote
SPACE does everything their advertising material claims and it does it well. I spent a lot of time studying different portable HDDs, and SPACE is, IMO, the optimal mix of functionality, size and price. Next time I take an extended photo trip I'm going to buy another one for double backups.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94759\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is all great information, and I appreciate everyone's excellent input.  The Jobo Digital Vu PRO would be my first choice, but at three times the price it's not in the budget.   However, I do have a friend who might want to buy and then loan me a Digital Vu for the trip, (are you listening, Miguel  ) which would allow me to show the people we're visiting some of our pictures--of them, and also of our life here.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 12, 2007, 03:45:27 am
Quote
Thanks for the cost analysis of film/digital storage. Do remember that, unlike film, digital is reusable. If the photographer goes on two trips, the cost of digital is slashed in half compared to film. Just something to keep in mind.

Phillip
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And what about White Blanced film also. Do film users only carry one white balanced type film, and then scan them in and WB in software? If not, then one would need to add even more film for different lighting situations. And then even more film when you have to take a roll out unfinished to replace it with anotehr roll with different WB properties.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 12, 2007, 03:53:51 am
Quote
There are no weather seals, though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94759\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You can buy a small Pelican Case, which is waterproof and airtight. www.pelican.com
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 12, 2007, 03:55:29 am
Thanks for the input. I'm going to Death Valley here soon, and since I sold my laptop, was looking for something like that. I think I'll get the HyperDrive choice too.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 12, 2007, 10:48:31 am
Quote
You can buy a small Pelican Case, which is waterproof and airtight. www.pelican.com
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95237\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Heh, I never thought about a low-tech solution  Thanks, best ideas are usually the simplest!
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: jani on January 12, 2007, 08:53:23 pm
Another suggestion:

Purchase two portable hard drives w/built-in CF readers, like the HyperDrive, and make backups to both of them.

That way, you won't have to purchase too many CF cards, and can retain a reasonable amount of redundancy.

And, for the record, two samples of the Epson P-2000 had no failures due to the height in Tibet (3600-4000 meters) in October 2005, but were much appreciated. Unfortunately, this is only anecdotal, and no real evidence of reliability at those altitudes.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 12, 2007, 11:30:03 pm
Quote
Another suggestion:
Purchase two portable hard drives w/built-in CF readers, <snip>
And, for the record, two samples of the Epson P-2000 had no failures due to the height in Tibet (3600-4000 meters) in October 2005, but were much appreciated.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Two portable HD"s is a good idea. The cost per GB of storage for a portable hard drive is about a tenth of the cost of a CF card.  Iwill's calculation of solutions earlier in this thread included, a card reater/viewer, the Epson P5000. That solution was Islightly cheaper ($100) than film and much cheaper ($400) than multiple CF cards. The down side is that with all your pictures on one device, if the device fails, all is lost.

If I want to forgo the viewing and MP3 features, I can get two Hyperdrive SPACE's with batteries for less than the cost of the viewer, providing duplicate storage that can be carried by a friend.

Since I'm not going be  photographing for long periods away from electricity all the time, I might want to resell or return extra or unused storage media.  The cards would be easy to resell, but I'm not so sure about the SPACE. There isn't as large a market, but I'm sure I could find a buyer at a good price.

I think, now,  that altitude will probably not be an issue.  As someone mentioned earlier, there are many computers functioning quite well at cyber cafes in Nepal and elsewhere.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: ErikKaffehr on January 16, 2007, 01:35:00 am
Nice example!

Having the Epson viewer you can even check your pictures and possible even see the dustspecks on the sensor that need to be cleaned. The solution I used when on Island was to have an Epson P-2000 and a 'no name' portable harddrive, so I had my pictures on two storage devices. But I was not hiking but traveling by car.
Erik


Quote
Misha - I agree that going for 85 rolls of film or 40 GB is a good compromise on this planning exercise, so let's see how that might work out in terms of cost, bulk and weight for film compared to the electronics he'd have to carry, along with the safety factors of splitting up the storage.

I've taken all prices from the current web pages at B&H Photo:

THE FILM SOLUTION:

Film:  Fujifilm 135 36 exp. Velvia 100 @$5.29 ea. x 85 rolls = $449.65
Processing:  Fujifilm slide processing mailer @$4.49 ea. x 85 mailers = $381.65
Total cost of film and processing for 85 rolls of 36 exp. = $831.30

Weight of 36 exp. film roll = 1 oz. x 85 rolls = 85 oz. = 5.3 lbs.

Size of 35mm film roll = 1.25" x 1.25" x 2" = 3.125 cu. in / roll
3.125 cu. in. x 85 rolls = 265.6 cu. in. = 0.15 cu. ft. = approx. 4" x 6" x11"
ELECTRONIC SOLUTION 1:

Sandisk 4 GB Extreme III Compact Flash card = $122.95 x 10 cards = $1,229.50

Weight of 10 compact flash cards = negligible.

Size of 10 compact flash cards = negligible.

So the compact flash card solution costs about $400 more than film, but has the least weight and least storage size, and requires nothing more to carry.
ELECTRONIC SOLUTION 2:

Epson P-5000 portable storage viewer = $679.95
Extra battery for above = 59.95
Total for P-5000 plus extra battery = $739.90

Weight of viewer plus charger plus extra battery = approx. 1.75 lbs.

Size of viewer plus charger plus extra battery = approx 96 cu. in.
= approx. 0.05 cu. ft. = approx. 4" x4" x 6"   

So the P-5000 solution costs about $50 less than the film, weighs about 1/3 as much and takes up about 1/3 the space of film, but weighs more and takes up more space than the flash cards.

Another point for the electronic solutions is that you can continue to reuse both of them for future shooting, while the film cannot be reused.

On the other hand, since safety factors are a concern for these once-in-a-lifetime shots, let's look at redundancy.  If one of our storage units is lost or damaged, we would lose one roll out of the 85 rolls of film, and a little over 1% of our shots would be lost.  If one of the 4 GB compact flash cards were lost or damaged, then we would lose 10% of our shots.  If the Epson P-5000 viewer were to suffer a catastrophe, then we would lose all (or almost all) of our shots.  So in this case, the film would be the safest, the compact flash cards the next safest and the the Epson P-5000 viewer the riskiest.

Since John's expressed concerns were safety for his images and light weight and small size for him to carry, I would have to say that carrying 10 each 4 GB compact flash cards seems to be the best of the three solutions considered here.  The cards would add virtually no weight or bulk for the photographer, would not risk the loss of too many shots if one card were lost (although 10% would hurt!), and could easily be sold afterward to recoup most of their initial cost.

The choice would be more difficult between film and the Epson P-5000 storage viewer.  The Epson is a bit cheaper, and is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the film.  However, if it fails up there, everything on it is lost, and no further transfers can be done from the camera card, so most of the shots of the trip would be lost.  Considering the cost and time and effort of this trip, that risk seems to be higher than I would like to take without secondary backup, which would add more cost, weight, bulk, etc.  If I had to choose between the two, I'd take the film.

Now we haven't looked at how many camera batteries he'd have to take in order to shoot for a week between recharging, but I believe that that would be doable.  A film camera does have the advantage of shooting way more than 85 rolls on one battery, and if the expedition were going to go for a month without possibility of recharging, then digital might not be practical.  In this case, with only a week between charging, a few extra batteries would probably do the trick.

I've learned that my initial reaction (film is the answer here) doesn't actually turn out to be true for this situation.  The electronic solution with compact flash cards for the storage medium seem to have a definite advantage over film.

I also agree that digital has a clear advantage as an icebreaker; film simply can't do that (unless you take a Polaroid along!), and that can have great advantages for getting the kind of pictures you want.

Irv
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 16, 2007, 02:40:45 am
There is one option that would make the Hyper Drive almost perfect: Hot swapable connections for the 2.5 inch drives. They state on their website that they do not recommend plugging and unplugging hard drives becsaue the connectors are not made for that type of thing--about 50 connections and reconnections and they are worn out. This is ike the connectors that are inide of your computer. They are lightweight and made to be plugged in and forgoten--except for a disk replacement. The HyperDrive would also be excellent if it had a plug for an external 2.5 inch in your own external drive holder connecting with a USB cable. The 2.5 inch drigves are capable of being powered through the voltage in the USB cable itself. It's not that there isn't enough space on an 80GB hard drive, but the redundancy factor as you have all pointed out.

I just ordered one BTW. It's suppose to be here Wednesday.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on January 17, 2007, 11:03:01 am
Quote
There is one option that would make the Hyper Drive almost perfect: Hot swapable connections for the 2.5 inch drives.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

ahhhh...could you explain this in English to a simple photographer?

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Tim Gray on January 17, 2007, 12:13:09 pm
Quote
ahhhh...could you explain this in English to a simple photographer?

John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96171\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Hot swappable: you run out of HD space in the middle of copying a card.  Plug in a new HD and it picks up right where the other left off.

FWIW I think this doesn't make a lot of sense, particularly the "hot" part.  If you run out of space, plug in a new hd and just copy the entire card over again.   Having said that, plugging drives in and out in the field isn't all that attractive.  Given the low cost of a bare Hyperdrive make sure the original disk is as big as possible and take a second one.   I suppose there's still the issue of backups - just copying the card to the drive doesn't create a back up.  If you're on a trip and shoot more than 120 gig of material, and need to back it all up then that's a different problem, you probably need a laptop with external USB or SATA drives.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 17, 2007, 09:42:19 pm
Quote
Hot swappable: you run out of HD space in the middle of copying a card.  Plug in a new HD and it picks up right where the other left off.

FWIW I think this doesn't make a lot of sense, particularly the "hot" part.  If you run out of space, plug in a new hd and just copy the entire card over again.   Having said that, plugging drives in and out in the field isn't all that attractive.  Given the low cost of a bare Hyperdrive make sure the original disk is as big as possible and take a second one.   I suppose there's still the issue of backups - just copying the card to the drive doesn't create a back up.  If you're on a trip and shoot more than 120 gig of material, and need to back it all up then that's a different problem, you probably need a laptop with external USB or SATA drives.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96181\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


It's not necessarily take it out in the middle of a write session. It's simply like having the ability on the HyperDrive to plug in another external hard drive by a USB cable.

So what you would do is buy a 2.5 inch hard drive and an external enclosure. For a 120GB 2.5 and the external enclosure, you're looking at about 90.00US for the drive and 20.00US for the enclosure. Then you just plug that into any USB port and you have more HD space. That's about 160.00 cheaper than a new Hyperdrive. So it's not really "hot swappable" but "external" drive friendly. After all, the Hyperdrive is an external hard drive with the capability to automatically download the files into itself.

So two HypDrs with 120GB HDs would be 600.00US. If they had a USB connector you could buy one bare HypDr (no hard drive) for 150.00US and two 120GB 2.5 drives with external enclosures for around 220.00US for a total of 350.00. So the price of two HypDr is about double that. This USB to HypDr also solves the problem of a backup copy.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 17, 2007, 10:13:58 pm
Quote
It's not necessarily take it out in the middle of a write session. It's simply like having the ability on the HyperDrive to plug in another external hard drive by a USB cable.

So what you would do is buy a 2.5 inch hard drive and an external enclosure. For a 120GB 2.5 and the external enclosure, you're looking at about 90.00US for the drive and 20.00US for the enclosure. Then you just plug that into any USB port and you have more HD space. That's about 160.00 cheaper than a new Hyperdrive. So it's not really "hot swappable" but "external" drive friendly. After all, the Hyperdrive is an external hard drive with the capability to automatically download the files into itself.

So two HypDrs with 120GB HDs would be 600.00US. If they had a USB connector you could buy one bare HypDr (no hard drive) for 150.00US and two 120GB 2.5 drives with external enclosures for around 220.00US for a total of 350.00. So the price of two HypDr is about double that. This USB to HypDr also solves the problem of a backup copy.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96285\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sounds like a viable solution but which only a very tiny portion of the most hardcore photography gadget geeks would use, ie. no market for it.

There's really no backup problem with HyperDrives or similar solutions: just buy two of them and copy the card twice. Sure, it's costlier than the solution you propose, but it actually exists.

BTW, prices of 2.5" HDDs are the same per gigabyte for 120GB and 160GB, so no reason to buy 120s unless you're short on money. 200GBs are considerably more expensive, though.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 18, 2007, 01:29:52 am
Quote
Sounds like a viable solution but which only a very tiny portion of the most hardcore photography gadget geeks would use, ie. no market for it.

There's really no backup problem with HyperDrives or similar solutions: just buy two of them and copy the card twice. Sure, it's costlier than the solution you propose, but it actually exists.

BTW, prices of 2.5" HDDs are the same per gigabyte for 120GB and 160GB, so no reason to buy 120s unless you're short on money. 200GBs are considerably more expensive, though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96290\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


It's not a geek thing. You can buy a totally enclosed 120GB 2.5 inch hard drive at Costco or online for slightly more. Then you just plug it into a USB port on the Hyper.  In other words, the Hyper Drive could come with a USB port, and everyone knows how to use that. I was just using the "make your own" enclosure/HD as an exmaple of how flexible having a USB port on the hyper would be. Having two has its advantages however, since you are creating a redundant backup systems, not just hard drives. Those things aren't cheap though.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 18, 2007, 09:09:02 am
Quote
It's not a geek thing. You can buy a totally enclosed 120GB 2.5 inch hard drive at Costco or online for slightly more. Then you just plug it into a USB port on the Hyper.  In other words, the Hyper Drive could come with a USB port, and everyone knows how to use that. I was just using the "make your own" enclosure/HD as an exmaple of how flexible having a USB port on the hyper would be. Having two has its advantages however, since you are creating a redundant backup systems, not just hard drives. Those things aren't cheap though.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96304\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It's not as simple. In addition to a USB port HyperDrive would have to have an extra HDD controller, be able to control and communicate the other HDD through the USB port. The UI would have to be redesigned to enable copying to/from the external HDD. HyperDrive does have a USB port - that's how it connects to a computer - but that's not enough as you need both hardware and software changes.

I'm sure the above changes wouldn't be too difficult to implement, but again, I have the feeling that market for such a bastard product would be miniscule. Most people who require double-backups do it either by attaching to their laptop when they get back home, or by buying two HyperDrives or similar products.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: Jonathan Wienke on January 18, 2007, 11:52:41 am
The whole idea of the Hyperdrive having a USB port to daisy-chain is kind of absurd. A card reader is less expensive than a drive controller, and then there is the extra UI complexity the have the Hyperdrive cntrol the other drive, and (worst of all) the fact that you're burning the batteries on both units even though you're only downloading data into one. If you want redundancy or extra storage, just get another hyperdrive. You're better off in so many ways, and it isn't really going to cost more when everything is taken into consideration.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: mtselman on January 18, 2007, 12:40:09 pm
Quote
The whole idea of the Hyperdrive having a USB port to daisy-chain is kind of absurd. A card reader is less expensive than a drive controller, and then there is the extra UI complexity the have the Hyperdrive cntrol the other drive, and (worst of all) the fact that you're burning the batteries on both units even though you're only downloading data into one. If you want redundancy or extra storage, just get another hyperdrive. You're better off in so many ways, and it isn't really going to cost more when everything is taken into consideration.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96395\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And just to add to that, the daisy-chain solution with one Hyperdrive and one plain enclosed drive still suffers from the "single point of failure" problem. If your Hyperdrive fails mid-trip, you won't be able to back up your cards to the other drive as it won't have card-reading capabilities.

 --Misha
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: fastcat on January 20, 2007, 02:16:11 pm
I have still another suggestion that would give you hard drive redundancy and MP-3 capability for less than $500.

I am an advocate of portable hard drives, having used a 30GB FlashTrax for several years in Africa and India. It had bad battery life but was otherwise very reliable. I recently upgraded to an 80GB Wolverine MVP, which seems to have excellent battery life. It has a color screen and is also an MP-3 player. Costco has been selling them for $250.

After reading this and other threads, I'm thinking of adding a Hyperdrive SPACE to give me redundancy for an upcoming trip to southern Africa. It looks like a bare enclosure with a 60GB Seagate drive can be had for just over $200. An 80GB drive should only add $20 or so.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 20, 2007, 03:15:52 pm
Quote
After reading this and other threads, I'm thinking of adding a Hyperdrive SPACE to give me redundancy for an upcoming trip to southern Africa. It looks like a bare enclosure with a 60GB Seagate drive can be had for just over $200. An 80GB drive should only add $20 or so.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96750\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't know where you get your prices, but 2.5" drives cost 1€ per gig here in Europe (for 100 and 160GB drives), and computer hardware is significantly more expensive here than US. You can buy an external HDD enclosure with 60GB HDD for about half the price you're quoting.

If you buy them bundled (as a ready-made package) they're generally more expensive, which is the same case with HyperDrives. Buy the casing-only and get the HDD yourself. Installing is a breeze and easy with the instructions that come with the casing.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: D. King on January 20, 2007, 09:22:21 pm
Quote
I'm going to Tibet for a month this summer, in areas where electricity, much less computers, will be hard to find. I will have to rely on what I take with me for storage and back-up of images.  I will need to travel light--heavy gear gets REALLY heavy when you are gasping for air!

I'm a little wary of bringing a hard-drive device, such as the Epson P-4000.  The roads are rough, and a broken hard-drive would be a disaster.  Also, I've heard that hard-drives may have trouble at high altitudes, since they run on a cushion of air.

I've begun looking at solid state devices that would work in the field.  The iPod, with a card reader, seems an easy choice: 80 gigs, tough and reliable.  Though it's not great for handling images, my primary interest is in downloading my flash cards; the trip will be very busy, and managing of the images will come after my return.   One disadvantage may be speed...the iPod and card reader would be relatively slow.

Another disadvantage is that there would be no way to make a second or third back-up.  If the iPod were lost, stolen or malfunctioned, everything would be gone.

Does anyone have suggestions?

Thanks,
John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=94195\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



If you're concerned about HDDs not working at high altitudes, I recently read that SanDisk has developed a flash unit in the 130 GB range.  These are supposedly the first in a series that will one day replace mechanical HDDs in our computers.

I'm not sure if it's on the market yet but I would suggest talking to SanDisk to see what's up with this.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 20, 2007, 09:38:01 pm
Quote
If you're concerned about HDDs not working at high altitudes, I recently read that SanDisk has developed a flash unit in the 130 GB range.  These are supposedly the first in a series that will one day replace mechanical HDDs in our computers.

I'm not sure if it's on the market yet but I would suggest talking to SanDisk to see what's up with this.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=96793\")

I'm guessing you're referring to the SSD. They are currently available at a measly 32GB (not 130GB) for a hefty $600 or so to OEMs only:

[a href=\"http://www.sandisk.com/Oem/Default.aspx?CatID=1477]http://www.sandisk.com/Oem/Default.aspx?CatID=1477[/url]
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: D. King on January 21, 2007, 12:43:54 am
Quote
I'm guessing you're referring to the SSD. They are currently available at a measly 32GB (not 130GB) for a hefty $600 or so to OEMs only:

http://www.sandisk.com/Oem/Default.aspx?CatID=1477 (http://www.sandisk.com/Oem/Default.aspx?CatID=1477)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



Yes, my bad.  But the report said they could be coming down in price pretty fast.  Maybe not fast enough for John's trip to Tibet but....
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 21, 2007, 01:04:49 am
It's really not relevant at this point, but to reply to both Jonathan and Feppe, the idea of having a bare HyperDrive that accepts USB connected hard drives is quite simple and could be included in the hardware main board easily. However, just as an example, they could make a unit that does not accept hard drives, but only USB 2.5 inch external HDs--one at a time. Now there is no more UI problem than the original unit--it sees all hard drives as ONE drive and copies files like it normally would to each drive. In fact, you can do that right now if you want to remove the hard drive from the unit and plug in another one. So there is no more "controllers" that need to be accounted for. There are several other ways that hardware engineers could accomplish this easy task with little additional cost, if any, such as a switch that shuts the onboard hard drive off when another is detected on the USB port. No one is talking about "chaining" hard drives together--that would be absurd because you only need one at a time for backup purposes.

True enough, having two HyPer Drives is better than one because of the HyD redundancy. But we were talking about cost also. If I had the money I'd hire young female models to accompany my on all my trips and teach them how to download the cards into my 5, 000 dollar laptops. And while were at it, I'll take two 1DSMIIs also, for redundancy. Just joking of course, but it's not just about what is best, but what is affordable.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: fastcat on January 21, 2007, 11:02:21 am
Quote
I don't know where you get your prices, but 2.5" drives cost 1€ per gig here in Europe (for 100 and 160GB drives), and computer hardware is significantly more expensive here than US. You can buy an external HDD enclosure with 60GB HDD for about half the price you're quoting.

If you buy them bundled (as a ready-made package) they're generally more expensive, which is the same case with HyperDrives. Buy the casing-only and get the HDD yourself. Installing is a breeze and easy with the instructions that come with the casing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=96755\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was talking about the HyperDrive SPACE bare case, which goes for $149 on the HyperDrive site, not a simple HD enclosure. Comp USA is offering a 60GB Seagate drive this week for $60. My supposition is that a simple search may produce a similar price for an 80GB drive.

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: dwdallam on January 23, 2007, 05:43:35 am
I just received my HyD 80GB from Adorama. It works, but there are some things people should know before buying.

Pro: Solid feeling nice casing.

Con: In order to take the battery out for replacement or alternate battery when it goes dead, you will need a small phillips type jewelers screw driver (provided) because the screws (4) they use are those little tiny itsy bitsy screws used in eyeglasses. I cannot figure out why they did this. It would have been just as easy to put small allen wrench type screws in, or for that matter, small thumbscrews that requiere no tools. What would have been even better is a snap out battery slot. Who knows why they enclosed the battery in a way that is so hard to get to it. Also, the entire unit is opened, hard drive and all, just to change the battery. It's obvious that swapping the unit's battery is NOT meant to be done, unless it won't hold a charge and needs replacing.

Pro: They sell an external battery back for 10.00US that uses 4 AA batteries.


On the other hand, the Canon batteires for the 5D and 30D will last I think about 300 shots? So you're gonna burn through 3 1/3 batteries for each 1 GB of images you shoot, so the HypD's 100GB transfer per internal charge is NOT going to be a problem, simply becsaue you can't carry enough camera batteries to keep up with the HyperD in the first place. You'll run out of camera use before the HyperD. So I guess teh battery thing isn't that big of a deal.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 23, 2007, 10:36:57 am
Quote
I just received my HyD 80GB from Adorama. It works, but there are some things people should know before buying.

Pro: Solid feeling nice casing.

Con: In order to take the battery out for replacement or alternate battery when it goes dead, you will need a small phillips type jewelers screw driver (provided) because the screws (4) they use are those little tiny itsy bitsy screws used in eyeglasses. I cannot figure out why they did this. It would have been just as easy to put small allen wrench type screws in, or for that matter, small thumbscrews that requiere no tools. What would have been even better is a snap out battery slot. Who knows why they enclosed the battery in a way that is so hard to get to it. Also, the entire unit is opened, hard drive and all, just to change the battery. It's obvious that swapping the unit's battery is NOT meant to be done, unless it won't hold a charge and needs replacing.

Pro: They sell an external battery back for 10.00US that uses 4 AA batteries.
On the other hand, the Canon batteires for the 5D and 30D will last I think about 300 shots? So you're gonna burn through 3 1/3 batteries for each 1 GB of images you shoot, so the HypD's 100GB transfer per internal charge is NOT going to be a problem, simply becsaue you can't carry enough camera batteries to keep up with the HyperD in the first place. You'll run out of camera use before the HyperD. So I guess teh battery thing isn't that big of a deal.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97135\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

A battery that is not user-changeable (easily) seems to be a current trend, unfortunately. At least changing the battery on HyperDrive is easier than on an iPod. The main consolations are the extremely long battery life and the fact that Li-ion batteries can be recharged hundreds of times before losing a significant amount of power.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: BlackeyCole on January 25, 2007, 06:43:43 pm
If it was me, I would contact Sandisk, Lexar, and Hyperspace and see if they would loan you a setup or sell you one a discounted price for your testomonial and review upon your return from the trip.  You have several unique areas that would not normally be availble for a field test all rolled up in one.  Altitue and remoteness from common power.  If you agree to return the item with a review/testimonial if they loan you one it would benifit them to let you do a field test of the extremes.  It would require some extra effort on your part to keep a log of your activity with each item and then compoise a article and testimonial upon your return.  It would be great for their sales if their system holds up under your trip.  It would help sell them to other extremist photographers and journalist.

I will have to look into the Hyperspace unit when the funds become available it would be great for backing up my photos onsite when I do event Photography.  It would also allow me to carry a full library along with me to sell photos from previous events  since the same indiviuals tend to be at the same type of events.  I have had several ask me for photos from an earlier event which I did have with me and they wanted to see them before they bought them.  And not everyone wants to order from a web site.

I thin the perfect way would if it could read one of the viewer type devices and that would be your second backup.  That way you could view you first back up on the view to ensure it was copied correctly and themn copy that file over to the hyperspace that way you know you have two good copies before erasing the CF Card.

 My workflow currently has me making a CD/DVD(depending on size needed) and then using Downloader Pro to make the directory structure and rename the images using my custom naming conventions to my working library, I then back up that data to another disk, then edit and delete images til I get my desire proofs, present the proofs to the client, take the ordrs and process the images per the clients requests deliver the final images to the client then I archive the while shoot to a single compressed file.  So now I I have at least four copies of any fianl image the original on the first CD/DVD, the renamed version on another CD.DVD and then a PSD and Final output copy in the compressed file.  If I need to retrieve an image for future use I got to the compressed file and retrive it , it I need to make changes ie different output size I use the pds coy to resize the image and output to a new tiff or jpeg depending on use, if not I retireve the original final image and create a copy of it .  If I have problems witht he compressed file I cna always start over with either of the cd/copies and since I know for a fact the original cd is valid I always have it to use and never have to worry about it being bad and not knowing it was curropted.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on January 25, 2007, 06:55:22 pm
Please note that none of the HyperDrive models have a viewing screen. The screen is for the UI only. All models have several verification schemes, from none to partial to full.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: WarrenRoos on February 15, 2007, 08:32:39 pm
Quote
Please note that none of the HyperDrive models have a viewing screen. The screen is for the UI only. All models have several verification schemes, from none to partial to full.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=97551\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I had a HyperDrive and sold it on Ebay. It's SLLLOOWWW boxy and big and while it worked with no problem it is very old school. Had the interface flavor of an 1986 Russian Dos product.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: WarrenRoos on February 15, 2007, 08:33:45 pm
Quote
I had a HyperDrive and sold it on Ebay. It's SLLLOOWWW boxy and big and while it worked with no problem it is very old school. Had the interface flavor of an 1986 Russian Dos product.

The JOBO GIGA Vu PRO evolution looks great if you go that way.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101146\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on August 07, 2007, 04:09:48 pm
Well, I'm back.  Everyone was so helpful, I want to share my experiences and results.

For back-up and downloading, I decided to take a Jobo GigaOne 80 gig.  This unit doesn't have a screen for reviewing, but I figured I wouldn't have the batteries, or the time, to do that anyway.  I love the unit.  It fits in a pocket, and is foolproof and very simple to use.  I had three 2gig CF cards, and could download and rotate them in the field if I needed to.  The portability and simplicity of the unit (and reliability) were a great advantage.

For batteries and charging,  I brought a SunLinq portable 6v solar charger.  This unit was light and traveled well, but during the rainy season we had some cloudy days ant a 12v unit would have been good insurance.  Also, the charging results were inconsistent (sometimes slow, sometimes fast under the same conditions), and I'm going to test the unit now that I'm home to try to figure out what was going on.  I brought three batteries, and that was not too many.  I could have one charging and keep two with me while shooting.  

I did not bring an adapter for the JOBO so that I could charge it from solar, and I began to run very low.  After a great deal of asking and looking around, and some good connections, I managed to find the only power point in about twenty miles for an emergency recharge.  In the meantime, I had to stop shooting RAW files for an afternoon to keep my card from filling up. (Larger cards would have given some breathing room).

We talked about the possible effect of high altitude on hard drives, but I didn't notice any.  There was a BIG effect on my brain, though, and for a couple of weeks intricate thoughts were....just to intricate!   I had only used the the Canon 5D for one week of intensive shooting before going to Tibet, and hadn't mastered all the operations (such as exposure bracketing).  This proved to be a challenge when the brain was working on low octane (30% oxygen).  Add to that jet-lag, poor food, lack of rest and generally difficult conditions.  You could anticipate that anything that you haven't mastered before you ascend will elude you up on the snowy peaks.

Most of my shooting was in monasteries and the lighting conditions were very difficult: virtually no artificial light and precious few windows.  The Canon IS lenses were virtually indispensable and preformed amazingly well.  Shooting in RAW format seemed essential, too, as jpeg will often "misinterpret" unusual light conditions and produce a distorted image.  I sometimes wished I'd brought a mono pod, but generally was happy for the freedom and lack of encumbrance....and weight--equipment gets heavy at high altitude.

Outdoors polaroid filters were the order of the day for rendering the brilliant blue skies, clouds and green hillsides.  Lens hoods, too.

Dust was everywhere, indoors and out. I was often shooting quickly and under pressure, and although I tried to change lenses as quickly as possible,  I did have some problems with dust, and hadn't brought proper cleaning equipment. That would be on the list next time.

Overall, the trip was magnificent.  The Tibetan people are open and full of heart, and being with them was a tremendous pleasure.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: feppe on August 07, 2007, 04:36:28 pm
Thanks for the thorough update. I'm curious, how much batteries did the JOBO actually consume? How many memory cards could you copy, what size and with what verification? Or how many gigs were you able to copy to the HDD with one charge?

And as for the HyperDRIVE being slow, that's most certainly not the case. It's one of the fastest in the market due to DMA-blaahblaahblaah. I should know, I used it as an external HDD for months. Sure, if you use 100% verification it's slow, but so is every other portable HDD. And yeah, the UI is horrendous, but after setting it up you don't have to push a single button to copy cards.
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: BernardLanguillier on August 09, 2007, 11:38:03 pm
Thanks for the feedback John.

Regards,
Bernard

p.s.: did you mean polarizing filter?
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on August 10, 2007, 10:18:37 am
Quote
Thanks for the thorough update. I'm curious, how much batteries did the JOBO actually consume? How many memory cards could you copy, what size and with what verification? Or how many gigs were you able to copy to the HDD with one charge?

And as for the HyperDRIVE being slow, that's most certainly not the case.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132015\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I copied about 25 gigs on one charge.  I didn't find the JOBO to be slow, but of course these things could always be faster!

John
Title: Solid State vs Hard Drive storage
Post by: John Swearingen on August 10, 2007, 10:19:23 am
Quote
Thanks for the feedback John.

Regards,
Bernard

p.s.: did you mean polarizing filter?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=132453\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, of course.

John