Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

What is the best way to store images on the hard disk?


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 HydraHeaded

HydraHeaded

  • Members
  • 42 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:36 PM

Posted 18 July 2009 - 10:08 AM

Is it better to leave the images as they are, in their individual folders, or would it be better if you use a software to make a zipped archive or an .iso, so that an entire folder of let's say 500 images becomes one file? Does storing too many images (which are very small files) cause more stress on the hard disk and so would it be better to make 'packs' and save them as large single files containing many images?

My question has only to do with the work the hard disk has to do when dealing with the images; it doesn't matter how much space is occupied (I'm not asking if zipping them will help in saving space). One reason I'm asking this is because when moving the files from one partition to another, thousands of files being moved takes a lot more time than a single file containing a pack of images. I recently moved about 8 GBs this way, and was wondering if this is a good way to treat the hard disk... :thumbsup:

Thanks.

btw, is this the right section to ask this question? I couldn't find any other.

Edited by HydraHeaded, 18 July 2009 - 10:09 AM.


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 dpunisher

dpunisher

  • BC Advisor
  • 2,234 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South TX
  • Local time:07:06 AM

Posted 26 July 2009 - 01:34 PM

I do realize it has been awhile since the original post.

For my archived pics/data I use 7zip to break it down. After that I use Quickpar to generate generous par files so I can reconstruct my data when it invariably goes bad. Zips + par files are about as close to foolproof as you can get.

I am a retired Ford tech. Next to Fords, any computer is a piece of cake. (The cake, its not a lie)

3770K @4.5, Corsair H100, GTX780, 16gig Samsung, Obsidian 700 (yes there is a 700)


#3 HydraHeaded

HydraHeaded
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 42 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:36 PM

Posted 26 July 2009 - 08:44 PM

I do realize it has been awhile since the original post.

For my archived pics/data I use 7zip to break it down. After that I use Quickpar to generate generous par files so I can reconstruct my data when it invariably goes bad. Zips + par files are about as close to foolproof as you can get.


Thanks for the reply. Actually, I am not really concerned about some of the data being lost over a period of time. I just wanted to know what would be better for the hard disk; whether saving thousands of images as they are on the hard disk makes the hard disk work more.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users