[Leica] Drowning in digital files

[glehrer at san.rr.com (Jerry Lehrer)]

Peter Klein wrote:
> I'm a bit of a squirrel.  I rarely throw anything away unless forced 
> to.  Then once in a while, reluctantly, I do a big cleanup.  As with 
> life, so with computers.  I have files on my computer that date back 
> to 1983, the year I started working with PCs, plus some converted CP/M 
> files from even earlier(!)  This has not been much of a problem--most 
> of it has been text, and the size of the hard drive on the new 
> computer I buy is always bigger than the old one.  So I never hit the 
> ceiling.
>
> Until now.  Enter digital photography, where one TIFF is the size of 
> my entire hard drive 10 years ago!!  A 16-bit TIFF of a scanned frame 
> of color film is about 125 megs.  An E-1 RAW file is 10 megs, and a 
> 16-bit work TIFF is 28 megs.  B&W films scans are 40 megs.  It adds up.
>
> My hard drive is nearly filled with RAW files, scanned TIFFs and 
> intermediate work TIFFs.  I was embarking on a ruthless rampage 
> through the directories, meaning to get rid of lots of digital flotsam 
> and jetsam. Then I found a keeper RAW file I hadn't noticed before 
> (see "Found on my hard drive").  And this gave me pause.
>
> Problem is, I end up with a lot of unneeded junk on my drive, but it's 
> hard to decide what's needed and what's not.   I'd be interested in 
> how other LUGgers cope with this--what do you keep? What do you throw 
> away? How do you decide?
>
> My inclination is to keep:
>
> 1. RAW file or the original scan.
> 2. Final version, unsharpened (8-bit TIFF, PNG, or high-quality JPG)
> 3. Reduced JPG for Web.
>
> But with film, sometimes it seems to make more sense to keep the 
> spotted version of the original, or even the 8-bit version after the 
> curves are right.  It depends on the image.  Sometimes I save several 
> version, decide on one, then come back and use another curve or 
> cropping later.  Or I don't spot until I decide the image is worth 
> working furthre.  That's where it gets confusing.
>
> Add to that, what format do you keep your final files in?  I used to 
> think TIFF was the only way to go, but I'm now wondering if PNG might 
> be better (lossless compression, often 30% smaller than an 8-bit 
> TIFF).  And I've read that some people keep a very high-quality 
> JPG--and I must say, with my E-1 DSLR photos, I usually don't notice a 
> difference between TIFF and such a JPG.
>
> I'm also wondering whether it's worth it to go through years of files 
> and delete intermediate files, or just buy a bigger disk and try to 
> streamline my future workflow to leave fewer files in the first 
> place.  Or buy a DVD burner--but I'm concerned about the longevity of 
> any home-burned optical media.  A big hard drive or two, plus a 
> matching external for backup seems better.
>
> Note that I use Picture Window Pro, not Photoshop, so I end up saving 
> several different files at various stages of editing, rather than 
> having layers in one humongous file.  Then again, I don't need a 
> gamer's PC with 2 gigs of RAM just to get by.
>
> --Peter
>
>
Peter,

Your saga of computer photography has only discouraged me from going 
digital!  I work at a computer for eight hours or more each day in the 
field of
aerospace engineering.  Now the thought of working at a computer for FUN 
has turned me off. It is not fun; tedium.

Jrrry Lehrer