C J D  <cjdKILLSPAM@nowhere.zzz> wrote:
>> Ron, maybe his time is worth more than your's?  He found a solution that
>> costs less than $400.  So long as he has a organization that keeps track
>> of all the images, it's likely to be much more cost effective to keep
>> the stuff.  You could spent weeks deciding what should go or stay.  And
>> compression -- why would someone who amassed 35k images think about
>> degrading them that way?
>
>He means file compression, like .zip, not image compression.

image files do not compress well.  And while compressed tiffs are a bit
smaller (and we don't know that his weren't in that form), it's not
a big savings - less than 50%.   Still not worth any extra effort.  

-- 
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com