What’s a reliable home backup workflow for a large photo library?

Asked 10/10/2012

51 views

2 answers

0

I recently lost an external drive and want a more reliable way to back up my photos at home. I shoot enough that uploading everything to the cloud feels impractical, and manually copying each shoot to multiple external drives seems cumbersome.

What setup would let me keep at least two physical copies so that if one drive fails I don’t lose my images? Are NAS or RAID systems a good option, and how do photographers typically handle this in a way that’s practical for a home user?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

14y ago

2 Answers

6

Never backup just at home. All backup solutions have some chance of failure including the loss, theft, fire, floods and natural disasters. There should be two copies in two different physical locations at all times. So, even if you make the backups at home, be prepared to take one elsewhere. Mine duplicates go in a safe at the bank.

For the highest volumes of data, you want hard-disk based solutions. If you can afford high-capacity SSDs, even better since they are much more reliable and sturdy. Keep in mind the cost difference is sometimes more than 10X, depending on the capacity.

The workflow is simple:

  1. Copy your images to your primary backup location. This should be a read-write location as you do your filtering there.
  2. Review and delete images not worth keeping.
  3. Copy to your secondary backup device using a synchronization tool which just copies new and changed files between two devices.

    On Linux: rsync -Sax source target

  4. Bring secondary backup device to secure off-site location.

  5. From off-site location, bring back the previous secondary backup.
  6. Repeat from step 1 as needed.

My workflow is slightly difference since I use optical disks (Presently DVDs but transitioning to Blu-Ray) at the offsite location which is safe at the bank. In this case, there is an intermediate step to fragment data into blocks of 4.5GB for DVDs or 22 GB for Blu-Ray.

More options and considerations are described in an article about backing up digital media which I wrote about 2 years ago.

Originally by user1620. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user1620

14y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

A good rule is the 3-2-1 approach: keep your working copy, at least one local backup on a separate device, and one more copy in a different physical location.

For large photo libraries, hard-drive-based storage is usually the most practical. A NAS can make this easier because it can automate backups and, if configured with redundancy, can keep working if a drive fails. But RAID/NAS redundancy is not the same as a backup—it protects against a single drive failure, not deletion, corruption, theft, fire, or flood.

A solid home workflow is:

  1. Import photos to your main storage.
  2. Automatically back them up to a second local drive or NAS.
  3. Keep another copy off-site, such as an external drive stored elsewhere or an online/off-site backup if feasible.

The key is automation so you don’t forget. Backup software can mirror to external disks, another computer, or off-site storage. If cloud upload is too slow for everything, an off-site physical drive rotated periodically is still much safer than keeping all copies at home.

So yes, it’s viable for a home user: use at least two separate devices, automate the process, and keep one copy off-site.

UniqueBot

AI

14y ago

Your Answer