Deathwalker wrote:

> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:vofihusb329re8@corp.supernews.com...
> 
>>Jason O'Rourke wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Ron Hunter  <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>Costco has an external 120GB Firewire/USB2 HD right now (Maxtor
> 
> 7200RPM)
> 
>>>>>>>for $179!
>>>>>>>These are great drives.  I have two of them connected to my laptop as
> 
> I
> 
>>>
>>>>>You'd be surprised what 35,000 Canon 10D/D30 RAW images can fill after
>>>>>they've been processed into full depth tif files...and...slide scans of
>>>>>50-100MB PER IMAGE add up to...
>>>>
>>>>Haven't you ever heard of compression, or the delete key, for that
>>>>matter?  Of course, you could just keep buying more storage, I guess.
>>>>Imagine how much space those pictures would be taking up on even 35 mm
> 
> film!
> 
>>>
>>>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?
>>>
>>
>>Compression using LZW with Huffman coding does not in any way degrade an
>>image, it just saves a LOT of storage space.  If the pictures are stored
>>in uncompressed .TIFF format, the savings can be up to 90%, depending on
>>the subject matter.
> 
> 
> I've never acheived more than 50% compression using tiff compression in
> photoshop.
> 
> 
A lot depends on just what the subject matter is.  Lots of sky, pretty 
good compression, lots of grass/trees, almost none.  That's why JPEG 
came along.