1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Shooting at lower res?

Discussion in 'General Equipment Chat & Advice' started by pixelpuffin, Nov 2, 2020.

  1. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    Just curious if anyone here actually shoots at lower resolution than the camera is capable of?

    Covering sons soccer is expensive not just in hardware but also memory cards. Right from the outset back in 2007 when I purchased my first digital camera (Sony cybershot T30) I have always purchased another card rather than reformatting. Today 13yrs on I use a 16gb cf card for each match, the files are copied over to a 16gb usb 3.0 stick and the CF is archived. The usb stick is then used for post work.
    However, I’m starting to think if I shoot at jpeg M instead of jpeg L I should be able to squeeze 2 soccer games onto each cf card and subsequent usb stick.

    However, what’s holding me back is missing the quality going from Large to Medium.

    Any advice??
     
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Not me, I only save raw files but I do empty the card every day. Cost per MB on a hard drive is probably less than using cards but I rarely buy cards, once they are in the camera they stay there.
     
  3. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    I shoot the higest quality the camera can produce, that's why I bought the camera. I take the images off the card as soon as I can, and make several backup copies.

    SD/CF cards aren't long term reliable storage and I genuinely don't understand your approach. You can clearly move from a CF card to a USB style drive, so just make that USB style drive a 2TB actual drive, and keep using the same card. You'll recover your costs in like 3 games.
     
  4. Bazarchie

    Bazarchie Well-Known Member

    I expect very few people use your method of storage.
     
  5. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    @ 8bitTony
    I’ve read so many horror stories of drives failing that it’s simply put me off.
    I format all cards prior to a game, 2hrs later the contents have been copied to usb and the card is archived. If a card goes down I’ll lose 1 game, but the edited copy will still be on usb stick. so although I won’t have originals I’ll still have something.
    Your reasoning for shooting at max res is one that’s stalling me too, why buy a better camera with improved sensor to then down grade it 2 generations? Seems crazy, hence why I asked the question.
    I’m off work Friday, so weather permitting I intend to go outside in the garden I’ll shoot a variety of subjects both at L & M then study them closely.
    I think the resolving power of the lenses added to the aps-c sensor will surprise me what can be achieved.
    I’ve already googled this question and what I’m reading sound positive.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2020
  6. RogerMac

    RogerMac Well-Known Member

    I normally also shoot at the highest resolution I have on the camera I am using(20 mb on the Pen and the 6D rather less on the7D) but if the image is destined of showing on a screen at 800 px I hate the extra process of size reduction and losing some of that lovely sharpness. Although club projectors go higher than 800 they are not much better.
    I think I will do some testing with lower resolutions to see if that helps
     
  7. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    There has to be an end purpose for downsizing an image. Detail is lost compared to the original but that’s deliberate, it isn’t intended to be seen in the final product which shouldn’t really appear less sharp.

    In Lightroom downsizing isn’t a chore. It is a do once simple batch job, create a publish collection, add photos and publish.

    If the end image is going to only be seen at a small size and is (through quantity) never going to be post-processed then medium or small out of the camera jpgs make eminent sense.

    I always have in mind that I’ll print large, and I take few pictures which is why I use raw. If I shot events every week then I certainly wouldn’t.
     
  8. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    All storage media fails, I guess your theory is you only lose at most, 16gb if a single card fails, but the chances of multiple card failures increases as you get more cards. Also, it's just a really expensive approach. Buy a new 2TB drive every year and have three rolling drives, it'll be cheaper than buying loads of CF cards.

    £57 for a brand new 2TB drive,

    upload_2020-11-3_7-26-2.png

    I dunno what you're paying for Compact Flash at the moment but,

    upload_2020-11-3_7-26-32.png

    That's an expensive way of doing it.

    Two £60 drives, copy the card to both drives, re-use the card. You'll recover your costs in 6-8 games. Replace a drive if it fails. At your rate, you'll never fill 2TB and by next year the 3TB drives will be down in price, etc.

    If you rate your own personal time, it'd be faster and cheaper just to not spend hours doing the comparison and buy some hard disks instead.
     
    SqueamishOssifrage likes this.
  9. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    Flash memory stored without power input is expected to retain the data for one to ten years. Some will retain data for less than a year, some for more than ten years. Hard disks have a retention period of nine to twenty years. Once again, some will lose information sooner and some later.

    However, data stored on high capacity hard disks is easily backed up. For example, I regularly copy my data from one disk to another and have it stored on a minimum of three disks at any one time. Storing images in the way PP is doing iseems to me an accident waiting to happen.
     
    ChrisNewman likes this.
  10. pixelpuffin

    pixelpuffin Well-Known Member

    Because of the new grassroots lockdown, I’ll now have time (after redecorating ) to decide how to move on. looks like I’ve amassed 20-30k soccer shots over the years. I’ll probably start going through and pulling pictures of my son playing and create a large photo book. The CF will then go back into starsge.
    I do have 2 drives that have personal family photos on. I’ll did the drives out and see if they are still working.
     
  11. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    It is entirely up to you how you use your cards but I would simply ensure that several other copies exist and then format and reuse them. I use XQD cards and there is no way I would keep them as storage/archives. A 32GB card is about £100 but, as stated above, a 2TB hard disc is £60. If I followed your practice I would need to spend £6000 on memory cards to achieve the same storage, it just doesn't make financial sense. As it is you have spent about £1,000 on memory cards when you could have spent £120 on two hard discs, I don't see that as being any more sensible financially.
     
  12. spinno

    spinno Well-Known Member

    In 20 years of digital shooting I have had one sd card fail on me and one hd drive get broken.
    I must be very lucky.
     
  13. Bazarchie

    Bazarchie Well-Known Member

    Same for me although a CF card in my case, which was probably my fault.
     
  14. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    I use multiple hard drives.
     
  15. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I have had two Kingston CF cards that failed, fortunately after having been downloaded, we retired the others of the same brand.I have seen a number of hard disc failures but that may be because I have come into contact with a very large number of hard discs in various devices. Back-up copies, maintained regularly, are the only answer, no current electronic storage medium lasts for ever.
     
    ChrisNewman and EightBitTony like this.
  16. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Agree absolutely.

    I have not (touch wood) have a card fail but my oldest CF/SD cards are probably those in my 1Div (bought 2012) and they are never removed. I think HDD are much more reliable than they were 20+ years ago but I wouldn't trust one to last a huge time. My oldest USB HDD is pre-2000, next time I boot my laptop to do windows update I'll see if it still works and when it was formatted. I can't connect it to my desktop without finding a USB extension cable - the drive has a integral cable that is only a couple of inches long - fine for laptop but it doesn't reach the ports on my desktop. My backup HDD from 2005 - 2010 is still readable.
     
  17. Fen

    Fen The Destroyer

    I shoot at the highest resolution that is available on whatever camera I'm using, that's RAW format.

    After a shoot the files are copied from the cards to my WorkDrive (2TB). I then go through them selecting (once added to Lightroom) the ones I want to keep, delete, edit, etc.,

    When that process is complete the remaining files are immediately backed up to a second internal drive (InternalStore 4TB).

    Next comes the editing and keywording. Once that is complete the files are backed up to InternalStore and then to two other drives, one internally and one external (both 4TB).

    After three months they are removed from my WorkDrive as I like to keep it clear. The files remain on the other three drives.

    None of the above drives are the boot drive for the computer. Hard drives are relatively cheap at the moment so investing in extra storage is a no-brainer. I learnt the hard way having lost a month's worth of work after a drive failure.
     
  18. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Similar to mine, except I don't keyword stuff I shoot for a client, I wipe delivered shots of my work drive one week after delivery (but that's either on my web delivery platform ((pompous git!)) or on a second flash drive for a further week, and is in a separate folder on my backups), and only my first backup drive is internal - one of the other two is an NAS, the other just an external drive. Stuff I shoot for myself or speculatively gets treated exactly as you do.
    One other point - my storage drives not only aren't the boot drive, they're not the PS scratch disk either.

    Touch wood, nothing has failed yet in my current setup, and none of my decent memory cards have failed. I did have a no-name 1GB SD card fail, but that came with a second-hand camera and was just dead when I stuck it in a camera for testing a couple of months ago.

    Oh, and none of the memory cards get reused until the files have been backed up to my backup drives. Cards are cheap enough for that, even if they don't make a good long-term strategy.
     
  19. EightBitTony

    EightBitTony Well-Known Member

    In summary, for most of us.

    1. copy from cards to large, long term storage.
    2. backup the long term storage to even longer term storage.
    3. re-use the cards.

    It's cheaper, and potentially, more reliable.
     
    Geren, Fen and IvorETower like this.
  20. IvorETower

    IvorETower Little Buttercup

    ^
    What Tony said.
    External drives are so comparatively cheap that for me, it's a "no brainer" to use them to store and back up my files (not just photos but other information too).
    On my way home from work last night I stopped to get a few essential groceries, and picked up the last "clearance" 2TB external drive .... £31-50 and I had a £6 off coupon to use too. SO about £25 for storage that will take me some considerable time to fill (especially with "lockdown 2" preventing me from going on trips out to take pictures, grrrrrr)
     
    EightBitTony likes this.

Share This Page