Photo storage setup

[chris_17]

I’m looking to upgrade my photo storage setup – exciting stuff, I know!

Currently, I’m using two (very full) 10TB HDDs mirrored with CCC. My most important files are also in the cloud.

I’m considering switching to a LaCie 2Big Dock 40TB with RAID 1 for redundancy.

I’d love to hear about your backup workflows. Do you combine cloud and RAID, or have a different system? Do you have a simple setup to keep your work safe?

Thanks!

 

[clee01l]

Having been burned in the not too distant past, I am not a fan of RAID. RAID is for commercial use when you need data up and available 7X24X365. This is not the case with Lightroom even for professionals.

You do not need redundancy. You need version controlled Back up In a redundant file set up, it you delete a file on one drive, it gets deleted on the redundant drive too. If you later discover that that file deletion was a mistake, tough!. The same is true for file changes. You can't recover the state a file was in 6 months or 6 weeks or 6 days ago. Cloning is not a valid backup solution. IMO, nothing beats Apple's Time Machine for backups. It backus up all of your critical user data from multiple drives to multiple destinations (the backup destination disk needs to be large enough to store all of the data on all of the drives being backed up. In the Windows world Acronis comes close to matching Time Machine in specs and performance. A good backup app runs in the background on a schedule. So you do not need to baby-sit the process.

My TimeMachine backs up my Primary volume and my Lightroom Data volume. It alternates between a destination on my NAS and a locally Attached volume. This is for redundancy in backups. Time Machine on my wife's MBP also backs up to the same NAS.

For complete insurance against fire, flood, pestilence or civil unrest, a cloud backup is recommended. I use BackBlaze. For ~$100 a year you get unlimited backup and 1 year of version history. For the price of your LaCie 2Big Dock, you can have 12 years of BackBlaze backup.

I'd keep the backup volume that you have and perhaps get another (NAS?) for duplication. Add a BackBlaze Subscription. Put the other $1100 in the back for future years.

 

[chris_17]

Having been burned in the not too distant past, I am not a fan of RAID. RAID is for commercial use when you need data up and available 7X24X365. This is not the case with Lightroom even for professionals.

You do not need redundancy. You need version controlled Back up In a redundant file set up, it you delete a file on one drive, it gets deleted on the redundant drive too. If you later discover that that file deletion was a mistake, tough!. The same is true for file changes. You can't recover the state a file was in 6 months or 6 weeks or 6 days ago. Cloning is not a valid backup solution. IMO, nothing beats Apple's Time Machine for backups. It backus up all of your critical user data from multiple drives to multiple destinations (the backup destination disk needs to be large enough to store all of the data on all of the drives being backed up. In the Windows world Acronis comes close to matching Time Machine in specs and performance. A good backup app runs in the background on a schedule. So you do not need to baby-sit the process.

My TimeMachine backs up my Primary volume and my Lightroom Data volume. It alternates between a destination on my NAS and a locally Attached volume. This is for redundancy in backups. Time Machine on my wife's MBP also backs up to the same NAS.

For complete insurance against fire, flood, pestilence or civil unrest, a cloud backup is recommended. I use BackBlaze. For ~$100 a year you get unlimited backup and 1 year of version history. For the price of your LaCie 2Big Dock, you can have 12 years of BackBlaze backup.

I'd keep the backup volume that you have and perhaps get another (NAS?) for duplication. Add a BackBlaze Subscription. Put the other $1100 in the back for future years.

Ah, that's a great perspective, thank you.

I have considered sticking with my current setup and adding a NAS and BackBlaze, but here are some of the issues I run into:

1. I have 10TB of data, getting that into the cloud (BackBlaze would take months, unless I used a FireBall which would be expensive).
2. I had ruled out NAS because it would be too slow to edit files across my home network.
3. A DAS Thunderbolt3 connection to my MacBook Pro (2018) would give me the speed I need for connection and editing.

 

[clee01l]

Ah, that's a great perspective, thank you.

I have considered sticking with my current setup and adding a NAS and BackBlaze, but here are some of the issues I run into:

1. I have 10TB of data, getting that into the cloud (BackBlaze would take months, unless I used a FireBall which would be expensive).
2. I had ruled out NAS because it would be too slow to edit files across my home network.
3. A DAS Thunderbolt3 connection to my MacBook Pro (2018) would give me the speed I need for connection and editing.

BackBlaze will spread out the initial upload over time But you have other backup. So, what's the hurry?
The Image files on the NAS is only a backup copy. Even if your original imported images are stored on the NAS, your editing takes place locally using Previews The main time you need to access the original is for exporting and printing. I use the NAS for timeMachine backup of my Mac Studio and my wife's MBP.
I have my LrC data and catalog on one of 11 TB 3 EHDs attached to my Mac Studio. Anything better than USB3 is preferred for data storage.

 

[Conrad Chavez]

I have considered sticking with my current setup and adding a NAS and BackBlaze, but here are some of the issues I run into:
1. I have 10TB of data, getting that into the cloud (BackBlaze would take months, unless I used a FireBall which would be expensive).
2. I had ruled out NAS because it would be too slow to edit files across my home network.
3. A DAS Thunderbolt3 connection to my MacBook Pro (2018) would give me the speed I need for connection and editing.

If you really require high capacity at Thunderbolt speed, then you might want a multi-bay DAS enclosure with NVMe SSDs in it, because hard drives and SATA SSDs won’t come close to Thunderbolt throughput.

For NVMe SSDs, some of your options for Thunderbolt enclosures at high capacity (up to 32TB of storage) are:
OWC ThunderBlade. This is a newer professional-grade solution suitable for video editing. 4 or 8 bays for NVMe SSDs at Thunderbolt speed.
OWC Express 4M2. Compact, affordable when bought empty, takes up to four NVMe SSDs. However, although it’s Thunderbolt and advertises “up to 2800MB/sec,” my understanding is that speed is only reached as a RAID; each individual drive slot apparently transfers much slower than that on its own. But, it’s probably still faster than 10Gb/sec USB 3.

Those are not endorsements, I don’t own or use either of them. I have used other OWC products for many years.

For photo editing alone, Thunderbolt speed is probably not needed. I edit using drives connected with 10Gb/sec USB 3, and that’s fine, and it saves a lot of money compared to Thunderbolt hardware. 10Gb/sec USB 3 can’t take full advantage of NVMe SSD speed (but really, neither can Thunderbolt, at least not until Thunderbolt 5 is more common), but 10Gb/sec USB 3 is still twice as fast as a SATA SSD.

 

[Gnits]

Not sure if you are Windows or Mac…. but if you can configure your rig…. consider
1. Install an M2 nvme drive internal. Select 2TB or 4TB or 8TB… suggested rule of thumb.. enough for your catalog and 2 years images (ie this years and last years).
2. As your existing disks are full, get 2 new disks… say 20 TB , sata. One internal, the second internal or external.
3. Each year move the older year from the M2 drive to the internal Sata drive.
4. The second hdd drive is for local backups.

This will work if you spend most of your effort on current and near current projects.

I am just outlining this as an option… and comments above are equally valid. I agree that raid for redundancy is for commercial 24x7 operations with skilled IT resources on hand and robust backup capability. If you need raid for performance then factor in how you backup the raid.

I bought a NAS some time back and stopped using it less than a week later, opting for internal hdd drives instead (SSDs were exotic at that time). It is in use not as a 3rd layer backup tool.

 

[JVMiddleEast]

What at face value seems like a relatively simple question, is actually a topic many of us are struggling with.
There are two main reasons for this:

1) There are many variables impacting the optimum solution for your situation: speed vs storage capacity, cloud or NAS or DAS, single drive or bunch of drives or RAID. To make it worse, one variable can have high impact on the other

2) The second reason is that many mix up terminology where certain terms are mixed up while their definition is different.
A common example is synchronizing versus back up.
Or some belief the purpose of a RAID setup is to increase transfer speed (which if properly setup it will do for some RAID configurations) but its main purpose is to distribute data over different drives in one enclosure in order to prevent loss of data in case a drive fails (any drive will fail some day).

In the end of the day, I would suggest the following:
1) define your needs today plus your anticipated future storage requirements. If you stick to photography only, speed is less of a factor compared to editing large video files
2) determine optimum setup for your needs plus 1 or 2 alternatives.
3) decide on your workflow: do you want to work of storage devices (regardless NAS DAS or internal) and back it up in the cloud or on other devices.
4) do you prefer that every change you make on your primary storage is mirrored to your cloud storage (that’s great if you work from multiple locations or work with more people on one project) or use the cloud as back up only.
Main difference: syncing means any change on primary storage is immediately mirrored to your secondary storage. So any previous versions are lost. Back up means snapshots are made and stored meaning older versions can be retrieved if needed.
4) costs. Many argue that cloud storage is expensive with annual fees plus many are worried about privacy protection etc.
So was I
But I now know we PCloud since few years. It works more it less like Dropbox however there a few crucial differences:
I. For individual folders you can select to use sync or use backup
II. Privacy: your files are stored on a European server hence Ruropean privacy laws (100 times more strict then US) apply
III. Encrypting; most cloud services advertise their service is encrypted. Yes it is during transport but once on their server it no longer is encrypted. Plus the service provider holds the key. With PCloud you hold the key. Nobody else in the world can open your files
IV perhaps most attractive: you can chose: annual fees plus many or one time fee for life long storage which delivers an entirely different financial option.