Canon IXUS 240 HS
Canon PowerShot SX240 HS
Nikon D800
Samsung DV300F
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Nikon Coolpix P510
Canon PowerShot SX260 HS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30
Nikon Coolpix S9300
CD-Rs Unreadable After 2 Years
The Independent newspaper yesterday published a very interesting article about the longevity of CD-Rs, or rather the lack of it.
“But an investigation by a Dutch personal computer magazine, PC Active, has shown that some CD-Rs are unreadable in as little as two years, because the dyes in the CD’s recording layer fade. These dyes replace the aluminium “pits” of a music CD or CD-Rom, and the laser uses that layer to distinguish 0s from 1s. When the CD is written, the writing laser “burns” the dye, which becomes dark, to represent a “1” while a “0” will be left blank so that if the dye fades, there’s no difference; it’s just a long string of nothing to the playback laser.”
So are DVD’s, which I’ve recently started using, a better alternative? Apparently not…
“Recordable DVDs are not off the hook either. The “dye chemicals” in write-once DVDs are similar to CD-R, though recording density and disk construction differ. “We’re in the process of testing DVDs and we’re sure that the same problems will occur,” said Horlings, who plans to publish his findings soon.”
So how do you currently archive your treasured photo collection? Cd-Rs? DVDs? Hard drives? Good old reliable film? Sounds like a great topic for the PhotographyBLOG Poll 
Website: The Independent - Ever decreasing circles
Canon IXUS 240 HS Review
Canon PowerShot SX240 HS Review
Nikon D800 Review
Samsung DV300F Review
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Review
Nikon Coolpix P510
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30
Canon PowerShot SX260 HS
Fujifilm X-Pro1
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX200V
#1 Donncha O Caoimh
This came up on slashdot yesterday and I've covered this and photo archiving on my blog too. It's scary that I might lose all my photos in one accident. My father still has prints going back 30 years, and they're great memories.
What I have done already is switch from taking photos at "high quality" and I stick with "standard quality" (which is around 93% jpeg quality in my Sony F717) to reduce file size. Everything's backed up to DVD-R, with monthly backups to DVD-RW until I amass another 4.4GB (usually only takes 2 months!)
Next year I'll probably rewrite all my photos to new DVD-Rs and maybe get another harddrive and mirror the photos using RAID.
9:51 am - Friday, April 23, 2004
#2 RickfromBama
Looks like those floppy drive Mavicas,or Panasonics that could use the 120MB SuperDisk,were a pretty good idea after all! Film is still the safest way to go and it looks like it always will be for archive purposes.
11:58 am - Friday, April 23, 2004
#3 Mark
While most of today’s digital media could well be unreadable in a decade, film will be viewable for much longer. In addition you will be able to scan your film/slides with increasing resolution forever. Don’t get me wrong I love my 10D, it is that I just understand the temporary nature of digital technology. Over 22 years in the computer industry has given me a healthy disregard for current technologies.
Oh yes, I store my images on pair RAID’d hard drives. No way am I backing anything up to my DVD writer.
12:45 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#4 David Lau
I find external hard disk the most cost effective, efficient and reliable for backup. I now have about 150G image files so it takes more than 30 DVD-R discs (4.7G capacity) to backup all of them. Imagine the time needed to burn all these (need to change disc 30 times manually), plus the cost of the 30 discs per backup session and the burner itself.
An external case with firewire or USB 2.0 connection and a 160G ATA hard disk inside costs about US$150, and can backup all my 150G files in about 1.5 hours. I only need to connect the disk to my PC and run the backup program, the rest is automatic and do not need my intervention. Remote hard disk can also last longer. Hard disk has mechanical parts so an internal one that runs most of the time when the PC is on may fail within 2-3 years. On the other hand, a remote one is not working most of the time and will last much longer when stored properly and safely.
It is important to backup regularly, not just for the newest files but to give your remote hard disk some regular exercise. But before backup remember to check the integrity of your files. Otherwise you are backing up rubbish and overwrite your good backup done last time!
2:31 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#5 Gary55
Archival CDs are available to everyone. One good brand is Mitsui, now named MAM-A. Life expectancy is 100-200 years depending on which model you buy. The cost is still almost nothing compared to the cost of losing your memories and important data.
3:07 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#6 Doug Jones
A fellow at National Institute of Standards & Technology has spent a year of his career researching this subject. NIST Special Publication 500-252 is a must read:
http://open-forge.org/dox/nist_sp500-252_CDandDVDCareandHandlingGuide.pdf
3:55 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#7 Mark
Maybe a CD-R will last a hundred years. But how many CD-ROM drives will be around to read them? Or for that matter how many copies of C1 will be around to process your RAW images? How many format and storage medium changes will digital files need to go through in the next 100 years? Then think how many will negative or transparencies? How many images from 150 years ago are still viewable, despite the fact that much of the technology of those days is available today? Just a thought.
5:15 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#8 Thomas Locke Hobbs
Buy 3 different brands of CDs. Make 3 copies of each batch and store them in different locations. The chance of all three failing is very low.
Every five years upgrade to the latest storage device. Make 3 copies.
If the Library of Alexandria teaches us anything it's that you should always make a back-up and store it somewhere else.
5:29 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#9 Bill
This is old information and I had a good laugh when I read "100-years archival life". I been working with computers for over 15 years at home and work. Computer technology changes so quickly the whatever you are using now two or three years will be obsolete, to the point you cannot even buy it anymore. I do not care what happens in 100 years! I might be dead by then or the equipment I need to read the information on the disks is not working or is found at flea markets/antique shows . I just want something for the next few years, then I will migrate to the next new thing whatever that is going to be. I am an early adopter of DVD-R, only because for of five CDR of photos could fit on one DVD. I rather have 20 DVD photos then over 100 CDR disk full of photos. I still use external HD because HD are so cheap now getting smaller. Just make me a happy camper for the next few years because I like change and I will change.
Unless you are backing up your photos to something else and that else is not in the same location where your original photos are you do not have a good backup plan. Technology will not help that.
Bill
6:31 pm - Friday, April 23, 2004
#10 marc l werner
This is the first time I have become aware of this 2-year fade out problem. This is huge, but in a bad way. Why have we the public not have known about this problem before? What do we do with all those cd's and dvd's stored with photos and all kinds of data?
This needs to be headlines news!!!!!!!!!!
And if this is true........what is the value of all the cd and dvd burners?............Plus this opens the door for new tools and technology's.
We need some big time help ASAP from some of you guys who really know what they are talking about...........
4:13 pm - Friday, April 30, 2004