Excellent post, Bob. I think you covered the bases completely. :-)
Best regards--Lynn Allen
>From: "Bob Kehl - Kvernstoen, Kehl & Assoc." <BobKehl@kvernkehl.com>
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best digital archive medium for scans?
>Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 19:39:51 -0500
>My long and detailed comments are below.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Mark Edmonds <email@example.com>
>Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 1:01 PM
>Subject: filmscanners: Best digital archive medium for scans?
> > Basically, I am looking for a long term (20 years+) storage medium to
> > archive my scans on. I don't have faith in CDR and tapes are also prone
> > long term problems so the only solution I can see is a magneto optical
>I'm curious, why do you trust MOD more than CDR?
>MOD will probably never become standard nor inexpensive.
> > Another problem is that it is all well and good to have a bomb proof
> > but it is no good if no one makes the hardware to read it in a few years
> > time.
>It really doesn't matter if anyone else has the hardware, as long as you
>As an example, although perhaps a poor one. I have some programs and data
>on 5.25" floppy disks from 17 years ago. During one of many computer
>upgrades about 8 years ago 5.25" disks were no longer a standard. I kept
>old machine with a 5.25" drive (although I could have installed a 5.25"
>drive in a new machine) . The point is: if I want the data I can transfer
>to 3.5" floppy disks or transfer it through my home office network to a new
>machine and put it on whatever medium is currently popular. The only
>inportant issue is that I must keep these disks refreshed because they are
>magnetic and I must transfer them to some other medium prior to disposing
>of, or failure of, the 5.25" drives.
> > So is there a clear cut winner out there? The two affordable options I
> > looking at are either the Iomega Optical drive or the Panasonic DVD-RAM.
> > Iomega seems to support a format which has some penetration in the
> > but the DVD-RAM looks like it might not have got very far. I am running
> > NT4.0 by the way.
>CD-ROM has been around for a very long time. It took along time to catch
>CD-R and CD-RW caught on quickly only because CR-ROM had been with us for
>long. DVD-Video and DVD-Ram are both new in comparison to CD formats. As
>the cost of drives and media continue to drop DVD-RAM in some format or the
>other will no doubt be the standard to replace CD-ROM and CD-R. Iomege
>probably gain a foothold in specialized markets as they have with their Zip
>and Jaz formats, but because their formats are proprietary they will
>probably never replace DVD formats.
>I've done a bit of research on storage media. Here are my thoughts:
>CD-R is currently the cheapest format for long term storage. If your
>storage needs can be met with CD-R it is probably your best low maintenance
>choice, as long as you can afford the time involved with burning CD's.
>you be sure to keep a CD drive or two available when their popularity
>ceases, if ever.
>DVD-RAM, although currenty more expensive, provides more storage per disk.
>If you need vast quantities of storage (for 4000dpi 8/16 bit TIF files
>perhaps) this is a very viable low maintenance choice. This is also
>time consuming, as writing DVD-RAM is painfully slow. You will also want
>be sure to keep your particular format drives available should they ever be
>discontinued in the future.
>Removable IDE hard drive storage is a higher speed solution for high volume
>storage. It is much less time consuming but requires more maintenance and
>attention. It is about as expensive as DVD, but much faster. 60GB IDE
>drives are now selling for about $150. That's about $2.50 per MB.
>Removable hard drive frames are about $15 each and the cartridges that
>the hard drives are about $10 each. Hard drive storage is, at least, as
>reliable as any other magnetic medium as long as it is removed from the
>machine and stored properly. One solution would be to archive to a
>removable IDE hard drive and copy to a second removable hard drive for
>redundancy. Remove both and keep them properly stored. Refresh them every
>couple of years to ensure data integrity by running scandisk (PC) or some
>similar utility. Another solution would be to set up an inexpensive mirror
>raid array to automatically keep a redundant copy of your data on line.
>This is the most hassle free but involves a slight risk, should lighting
>strike or some other catastrophy take out your entire machine.
>As hard drive costs are dropping as quickly, or more quickly, than other
>media, I feel this is the best solution for those who want hassle free,
>speed, high volume storage. Like DVD it is getting less and less expensive
>but is not for the faint of wallet. : )
>For me paying $150 for 60 GB of storage is pretty painless since I remember
>not that long ago (for some of us) paying $1000 for a 10 MB hard disk. Yes
>I said 10 MEGA bytes. It was new technology in 1984. Most people only had
>2-5 MB hard drives.
>Way more than my US $0.02 worth!
>Kvernstoen, Kehl & Associates
>Star Prairie, WI 54026
>Check out our website: www.kvernkehl.com
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp