Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • I use Flickr (free version) and Google Photos (free version).

      I would say the Flickr is not designed as a backup service, more of a portfolio type service for displaying your photos on. In addition the free service is limited to 1000 photos, though the paid "Pro" version is basically unlimited.

      Google Photos is more of a backup service, and can get desktop/phone app which will automatically upload your photos to it. However, on the free version your photos are compressed so will loose a bit of quality if you have more than 15gb of photos. This isn't an issue on the paid version

    • IMHO nothing is free. With all the security breaches targeting "free cloud" services, I would offer up that Smugmug Paid is your best trustworthy option.

    • I have been a SmugMug customer for many years and I am very happy with the service. There are different account levels available (at different prices). If you want to see an example of a SmugMug site you can visit my site at https://www.denisegoldberg.com/. Keep in mind that the look and feel of the size is customizable.

      I do not consider SmugMug to be my (safety) backup though. My site contains a sampling of my work, and it contains only the .jpg files, not the source RAW files.

    • I only really know one of these services - but what I really like about Google Photos is how seamless it works.

      On the phone, I take images and they are backed up whenever the connection allows for it. I can then free up space on the device, but still view individual photos whenever necessary. They are also available to me via the web interface anywhere.

      On the desktop, I basically have two folders for images I download from my DSLR - an "incoming" folder of unsorted images, and a "backup" folder where I arrange photos any way I deem necessary. That second folder gets uploaded to Google Photos as well, via their "Backup & Sync" app.

    • I don't know if I'm the worst person to reply or best since I co-founded SmugMug and own part of SmugMug and Flickr.

      True confession time: I back up everything to Google Photos and pay for it. I don't want them to downres my stuff.

      There are two reasons I use them: (1) they take everything from RAW files to the strange movie files I have. (2) their image recognition is the best.

      If I search for Vilen I get this real photo that I didn't tag, it figured out who was in the photo through some kind of magic:

      I also have a SmugMug site for the photos and videos I want to display and embed in sites like Cake and Adventure Rider. I have a ton of family videos there that the parents want there and not on YouTube so they can feel safe when their kids play them.

    • Whatever you choose, just remember that you shouldn’t trust any of these services as a true single backup.

    • 'Tis written - Blessed are the Geeks - for they maketh the backups.

      You can buy a 2-3-4-6 or 8TB USB3 drive for comparitively not much these days.

      I make a backup of the backup on several.

    • SmugMug and Flickr are wonderful for sharing photos, but I don't use them for backup for two reasons. 1) They do not support RAW and 2) unlike dedicated backup services, restoring photos to a local hard drive is painful because they don't provide bi-directional syncing.

      Google Photos has amazing software for search and organization, but it compresses your photos to 16 megapixels.

      Like @Chris, I use Google Drive because I shoot and store all my photos in RAW. I found Google Drive to be the cheapest lossless way to store and access RAW photos in the cloud. Dropbox is great too, but if you have terabytes like me, Google Drive is cheaper. I have an enterprise Google Drive account where I pay $40/month for 10TB.

      Like @petebocken says, "remember that you shouldn’t trust any of these services as a true single backup." Losing photos in the cloud does happen, like in the case of PictureLife. Or hypothetically, what if your billing lapses while you're on an extended vacation, and Google deletes your account?

      For this reasons, I have a Synology NAS at home that stores a complete local copy of my photo library. The Synology runs a Google Drive assistant that manages syncing and archiving the photo library.

    • Google Photos has amazing software for search and organization, but it compresses your photos to 16 megapixels.

      This is a setting you can configure for yourself. You can either back up your photos in "high quality" (16MP) for free, or you can back them up in "original quality" using your storage space:

      Every Google account has 15GB of storage space for free. This space is shared between Photos, Drive, Gmail and probably some other apps. If you run out of space, there's a range of plans starting from 1.99/month for 100GB:

    • Ah, that is good to know. Thanks for pointing that out. Google says that for Original Quality backup option:

      All photos and videos are stored in the same resolution that you took them.

      Reading in between the lines, it's possible to store them in the same pixel resolution they were taken in and compress the heck out of the image. So, do we know if they compress the file size even if you're paying for "Original" backup?

    • I totally agree that the services are worth it for the ease of sharing and distribution.

      Remember Google+ and Photobucket?

      That's why I choose to manage my own backups.

    • I feel like Amazon, Apple and Google are pretty reliable in terms of backup — especially if you're willing to pay. I had a NAS for a long time and it kept needing maintenance and repair, so I eventually gave it up for Google, with redundancy at Amazon.

    • Reading in between the lines, it's possible to store them in the same pixel resolution they were taken in and compress the heck out of the image. So, do we know if they compress the file size even if you're paying for "Original" backup?

      That is a valid concern, given that images <16MP are still recompressed when uploading in "high quality" - but I don't think that they do this to "original quality" uploads. Paid space is paid space, after all. :)

      I just tested this:

      - take a high ISO image in a dark room while image qualities are set to high, resulting in basically black images with a fair amount of noise (~2.5MB JPG, ~22.5MB RAW @ 20MP). These images should be fairly easy to recompress, because none of the noise in the lower bits is really visible.

      - set Google Photos to "Original quality", upload images.

      - set Google Photos to "High quality". At this time I'm asked if I want to recompress formerly uploaded images, which I decline.

      - download images again. The duplicates have the same size in bytes as the originals.

      Recompressing images could still be done at a later point, but I doubt that this is the case.