Mac users: Backup options?

[Winter]

I just bought an iMac but have been a PC user all my life, so I have some (possibly stupid) questions about backing up photos:

1. Do you use Time Machine for backing up your photos? (Is that a good way to keep photos backed up automatically whenever you import new ones?)

2. Is the AirPort Time Capsule a good choice for backup storage? I don't really understand about it being a base station. Will it make my wi-fi at home faster? I use Sky broadband.

3. If not, can you recommend a reliable external hard drive? I'll be using it primarily for backup now, but may need to buy more for extra storage in the future.

4. Is it worth getting a Thunderbolt hard drive?

5. How often do you change your backup/storage hard drive? (I read an article that recommended once every 3 years. But if I do get an Airport Time Capsule, I don't want to have to throw one away every 3 years!)

Notes:

- I will probably also be backing up my photos on Amazon since I have Prime membership.
- My budget is £300. (But cheaper the better, of course. )
- Just for backups, I'll probably only need 2TB for now (because that's the capacity of my iMac, not because I actually have so much stuff!)

Would appreciate any advice in this area! I've been reading about photography workflow and, as I'm just starting to be serious about photography and am new to Mac, I kind of want to get everything set up right from the beginning.

Thanks!

 

[neil_g]

4 - My opinion no. Unless you want to daisy chain and/or want to run SSD arrays. Otherwise the cost does not justify the performance.

5 - My drives are up to 5 years

 

[THIRTYFIVEMILL]

I use a Synergy DS512 dual HD. It has two HDs so you can back up to both in case one died. Always best to get all your images off the MAC itself or you'll soon swamp it and slow it down.

 

[rob-nikon]

Have a look at Carbon Copy Cloner (CCC). I use time machine to one external hard drive, CCC to another external hard drive and have an off site external hard drive that backs up every time I connect it. CCC sends me an email when it's completed. I have it set to turn on the computer at 2am, run the backup and switch again. Once run it sends me an email to say it's completed fine. The external hard drives are a couple of WD passport types.

 

[JonathanRyan]

1. No. It's good for documents, terrible for photos. Also, when it fails recovery is basically impossible. It's an as well as, not an instead of backup (FWIW my work pictures are excluded from Time Machine)

2. Not really. I have one and it's fine if pricey (I bought mine cheap) but overspecced if you just want backup.

3. Nope - there aren't any I like WD drives because the bus powered ones are pretty. Buy something you like by a top tier manufacturer that isn't Lacie and you'll be ahead of the game.

4. IMO no.

5. When they break

What I would do is.....

1. Get a 3TB drive (it takes >2TB to back up 2TB in Apple's magic format), connect it to your computer (via a wired network is a really good option) and tell OS X it's a Time Machine drive. Forget about it until you get an error message

2. Get a USB3 external hard drive (your choice of bus powered or standalone - depends on your circumstances) and every time you take some pics get your app (e.g. Lightroom) to make a backup of everything you shot to it.

3. When you have "finished" your images, save them to a designated location on your Mac. Buy a copy of Chronosync and have it sync this folder to your EHD from step 2 and your cloud drive. (If Amazon have functionality like Dropbox then just make the place you save the files your local Amazon drive)

IMO for most home users that's as bullet proof as you need.

 

[Ryan_W]

Apple Time Capsule does the job for me... Super easy.

 

[srichards]

I use idrive. There is a mac version of the back up tool and it just sits there and backs everything up. No effort required. I tried livedrive. It was dreadful.

There's also the icloud option. If you have 1TB or less then that is easy peasy for photos. If you use the photos app it just hoofs them up into the icloud automatically. I'd hope there would be a plugin for lightroom etc that would do the same but I don't know.

I have heard good things about crashplan.

For offsite storage you are limited to how fast your broadband is. I'd probably get some local HDDs and then use cloud storage for very important things as local storage is no good if the house burns down/ it's pinched/ cat pukes on it etc.

 

[Winter]

4 - My opinion no. Unless you want to daisy chain and/or want to run SSD arrays. Otherwise the cost does not justify the performance.

5 - My drives are up to 5 years

Thanks for your answers! So, do you only replace your external drives when they break?

I use a Synergy DS512 dual HD. It has two HDs so you can back up to both in case one died. Always best to get all your images off the MAC itself or you'll soon swamp it and slow it down.

Thanks! I'll have a look at the Synergy. So... do you not store any images on the Mac itself? Is my 2TB fusion drive going to just sit there nearly empty all the time? (I'm expecting applications and other data to just take up maybe 250GB of space.)

Have a look at Carbon Copy Cloner (CCC). I use time machine to one external hard drive, CCC to another external hard drive and have an off site external hard drive that backs up every time I connect it. CCC sends me an email when it's completed. I have it set to turn on the computer at 2am, run the backup and switch again. Once run it sends me an email to say it's completed fine. The external hard drives are a couple of WD passport types.

Wow, that is a lot of backing up! But I guess better safe than sorry!

1. No. It's good for documents, terrible for photos. Also, when it fails recovery is basically impossible. It's an as well as, not an instead of backup (FWIW my work pictures are excluded from Time Machine)

2. Not really. I have one and it's fine if pricey (I bought mine cheap) but overspecced if you just want backup.

3. Nope - there aren't any I like WD drives because the bus powered ones are pretty. Buy something you like by a top tier manufacturer that isn't Lacie and you'll be ahead of the game.

4. IMO no.

5. When they break

What I would do is.....

1. Get a 3TB drive (it takes >2TB to back up 2TB in Apple's magic format), connect it to your computer (via a wired network is a really good option) and tell OS X it's a Time Machine drive. Forget about it until you get an error message

2. Get a USB3 external hard drive (your choice of bus powered or standalone - depends on your circumstances) and every time you take some pics get your app (e.g. Lightroom) to make a backup of everything you shot to it.

3. When you have "finished" your images, save them to a designated location on your Mac. Buy a copy of Chronosync and have it sync this folder to your EHD from step 2 and your cloud drive. (If Amazon have functionality like Dropbox then just make the place you save the files your local Amazon drive)

IMO for most home users that's as bullet proof as you need.

Thanks for answering ALL my questions and the extra advice! Now I have a few more questions if you don't mind!

1. What is wrong with Lacie?

2. So it's better for my Time Machine drive to be wired? That means it's plugged in to the iMac 24/7 permanently?

3. What about the other USB3 EHD you mentioned? Does that mean I get a second hard drive but only plug it in whenever I need to back up new photos or sync on this Chronosync thing? Or is this second drive also plugged in 24/7 permanently?

Thanks!

Apple Time Capsule does the job for me... Super easy.

Thanks, I do like the idea of it being easy, cos I'm going to have such a steep learning curve as it is switching to Mac after decades of PC.

I use idrive. There is a mac version of the back up tool and it just sits there and backs everything up. No effort required. I tried livedrive. It was dreadful.

There's also the icloud option. If you have 1TB or less then that is easy peasy for photos. If you use the photos app it just hoofs them up into the icloud automatically. I'd hope there would be a plugin for lightroom etc that would do the same but I don't know.

I have heard good things about crashplan.

For offsite storage you are limited to how fast your broadband is. I'd probably get some local HDDs and then use cloud storage for very important things as local storage is no good if the house burns down/ it's pinched/ cat pukes on it etc.

Thanks for all the recommendations! I'll have a look at the stuff you mentioned. Although not sure about iCloud since I already have Amazon paid for, and don't really fancy paying for another cloud storage!

 

[ecoleman]

1. Yes, it's great for backups and easy to look back in time if you quickly need to recover a file. It's on site storage so I also have other software that syncs all my files and photos to the cloud as offsite storage.

2. Waste of money IMO. Just get yourself a good external HDD.

3. I use WD, but there are plenty of good external drives.

4. It's a backup which happens in the background so thunderbolt would be overkill.

5. When / if it fails.

 

[JonathanRyan]

1. What is wrong with Lacie?

>> They put cheap hard drives in very pretty cases and charge a lot of money for it. If the bit between the two goes (and it seems quite common with LaCies) then it's pretty hard to recover. In some cases they glue the HD into the housing. (This is all based on experience > 5 years ago - they may have got better.)

2. So it's better for my Time Machine drive to be wired? That means it's plugged in to the iMac 24/7 permanently?

>> Well it would be best to wire it into a network and have your computer also wired to the network Probably the best options in order are ethernet, WiFi, USB3, USB2, Thunderbolt (only because it's so expensive)

3. What about the other USB3 EHD you mentioned? Does that mean I get a second hard drive but only plug it in whenever I need to back up new photos or sync on this Chronosync thing? Or is this second drive also plugged in 24/7 permanently?

>> If you got a bus powered one then it would turn on when you booted the Mac and turn off when you shut down. Or you can turn it on when you need it and off when you don't. Lots of variables in how you work. (WARNING: there's a long standing bug in OS X that makes it disconnect some USB drives when it sleeps. This appears to have gone away in recent versions of OS X but if you get repeated warnings about failing to disconnect drives then you probably don't want to leave the drive on while the computer sleeps. I wouldn't worry about it unless it happens.)

 

[rob-nikon]

Thanks for your answers! So, do you only replace your external drives when they break?

Wow, that is a lot of backing up! But I guess better safe than sorry!

When talking about backing up you need several copies to ensure your data is safe. I forgot to mention I also save all final JPEGs to a hidden folder on my website as my 'cloud' backup. Since updating to CCC version 4 I've been really impressed with it. The email confirmation is great as you know its backup ok. I also like the fact that time machine and one of my CCC backups are automatic. The off site backup and website JPEG storage is manually and thats where I let it down.

I wrote about my backup configuration on my website, you can read it in the link below. Its not perfect but it does the job for me. I do need to update it now I've changed to CCC V4 and added the email confirmation.

http://www.robcainphotography.com/imac-backup

 

[rob-nikon]

This is a good read.

http://www.davidmarx.com/photoshop-lightroom-5-tutorials/professional-grade-backup-plans/

 

[Andy Taylor]

1 Time Machine is an excellent way to back up your whole machine including your photos. It also supports backup to multiple drives.
2 A Time Capsule is a wireless router with storage built in. It's dead easy to set up with Time Machine and great for backing up multiple Macs.
The biggest advantage is that you don't have to remember to plug it in and it can be kept away from your machine in case of theft.
It can replace or complement the wireless function of your Sky router, but you can't replace the Sky router entirely.
3 External drives are a commodity item nowadays. Like any hard drive, they can fail without warning.
4 Thunderbolt drives are very fast and very expensive. Unless you're working with a lot of large video files, don't bother.
5 Ideally, replace your drives before they fail. If you have more than one backup, then replace them immediately when they fail.

With a budget of £300, I would get a couple of these or something similar: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00HZWB6JU and keep the £150 left over for something else*.
I'd keep one drive permanently attached to the iMac and the other one somewhere safe away from the machine. I'd set a reminder to back up to the second drive every week (or more frequently as needed).

Using Amazon Prime for your photos is a great idea and something I do already.

* that something else could be 2-3 years subscription to a remote backup service such as CrashPlan, BackBlaze or Carbonite. You need a decent broadband connection for these to work effectively.

 

[Andy Taylor]

No. It's good for documents, terrible for photos. Also, when it fails recovery is basically impossible. It's an as well as, not an instead of backup (FWIW my work pictures are excluded from Time Machine)

There's no difference between a document and a photo - both are just data

this site has some useful information on how to fix Time Machine if it breaks: http://pondini.org/TM/Troubleshooting.html

 

[Winter]

1. Yes, it's great for backups and easy to look back in time if you quickly need to recover a file. It's on site storage so I also have other software that syncs all my files and photos to the cloud as offsite storage.

2. Waste of money IMO. Just get yourself a good external HDD.

3. I use WD, but there are plenty of good external drives.

4. It's a backup which happens in the background so thunderbolt would be overkill.

5. When / if it fails.

Great! Thanks for all the answers!

1. What is wrong with Lacie?

>> They put cheap hard drives in very pretty cases and charge a lot of money for it. If the bit between the two goes (and it seems quite common with LaCies) then it's pretty hard to recover. In some cases they glue the HD into the housing. (This is all based on experience > 5 years ago - they may have got better.)

2. So it's better for my Time Machine drive to be wired? That means it's plugged in to the iMac 24/7 permanently?

>> Well it would be best to wire it into a network and have your computer also wired to the network Probably the best options in order are ethernet, WiFi, USB3, USB2, Thunderbolt (only because it's so expensive)

3. What about the other USB3 EHD you mentioned? Does that mean I get a second hard drive but only plug it in whenever I need to back up new photos or sync on this Chronosync thing? Or is this second drive also plugged in 24/7 permanently?

>> If you got a bus powered one then it would turn on when you booted the Mac and turn off when you shut down. Or you can turn it on when you need it and off when you don't. Lots of variables in how you work. (WARNING: there's a long standing bug in OS X that makes it disconnect some USB drives when it sleeps. This appears to have gone away in recent versions of OS X but if you get repeated warnings about failing to disconnect drives then you probably don't want to leave the drive on while the computer sleeps. I wouldn't worry about it unless it happens.)

Ahh, thanks! Luckily you mentioned Lacie. It was going to be one of my top choices since it's in the Apple store, lol. Also, thanks for the info on bugs and whatnot!

When talking about backing up you need several copies to ensure your data is safe. I forgot to mention I also save all final JPEGs to a hidden folder on my website as my 'cloud' backup. Since updating to CCC version 4 I've been really impressed with it. The email confirmation is great as you know its backup ok. I also like the fact that time machine and one of my CCC backups are automatic. The off site backup and website JPEG storage is manually and thats where I let it down.

I wrote about my backup configuration on my website, you can read it in the link below. Its not perfect but it does the job for me. I do need to update it now I've changed to CCC V4 and added the email confirmation.

http://www.robcainphotography.com/imac-backup

This is a good read.

http://www.davidmarx.com/photoshop-lightroom-5-tutorials/professional-grade-backup-plans/

Cool! Thanks for the links!

1 Time Machine is an excellent way to back up your whole machine including your photos. It also supports backup to multiple drives.
2 A Time Capsule is a wireless router with storage built in. It's dead easy to set up with Time Machine and great for backing up multiple Macs.
The biggest advantage is that you don't have to remember to plug it in and it can be kept away from your machine in case of theft.
It can replace or complement the wireless function of your Sky router, but you can't replace the Sky router entirely.
3 External drives are a commodity item nowadays. Like any hard drive, they can fail without warning.
4 Thunderbolt drives are very fast and very expensive. Unless you're working with a lot of large video files, don't bother.
5 Ideally, replace your drives before they fail. If you have more than one backup, then replace them immediately when they fail.

With a budget of £300, I would get a couple of these or something similar: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00HZWB6JU and keep the £150 left over for something else*.
I'd keep one drive permanently attached to the iMac and the other one somewhere safe away from the machine. I'd set a reminder to back up to the second drive every week (or more frequently as needed).

Using Amazon Prime for your photos is a great idea and something I do already.

* that something else could be 2-3 years subscription to a remote backup service such as CrashPlan, BackBlaze or Carbonite. You need a decent broadband connection for these to work effectively.

Thanks for the answers and recommendations!

 

[simonm8]

I have used time capsule for years and no problems. That's backs up my Mac. But the only photos on there are ones in currently working on. Once finished I copy them to 2 portable hard drives. 1 that's stays in my house and one that lives at my mums house. And normally every 3 months on a 3rd drive i do a full backup of Mac and keep that at work.

You other option would be to buy a naz box and set it up as a raid drive. You then have the redundancy that if one drive fails you have the other drive as a fail safe. This works fine with time machine over wifi.

 

[Winter]

I have used time capsule for years and no problems. That's backs up my Mac. But the only photos on there are ones in currently working on. Once finished I copy them to 2 portable hard drives. 1 that's stays in my house and one that lives at my mums house. And normally every 3 months on a 3rd drive i do a full backup of Mac and keep that at work.

You other option would be to buy a naz box and set it up as a raid drive. You then have the redundancy that if one drive fails you have the other drive as a fail safe. This works fine with time machine over wifi.

Thanks for your feedback! I'm quite tempted to get the time capsule cos it's so pretty but I've been reading that it's a redundant cost if you don't need the router part, so I dunno.

 

[dejongj]

1. Do you use Time Machine for backing up your photos? (Is that a good way to keep photos backed up automatically whenever you import new ones?)

2. Is the AirPort Time Capsule a good choice for backup storage? I don't really understand about it being a base station. Will it make my wi-fi at home faster? I use Sky broadband.

3. If not, can you recommend a reliable external hard drive? I'll be using it primarily for backup now, but may need to buy more for extra storage in the future.

4. Is it worth getting a Thunderbolt hard drive?

5. How often do you change your backup/storage hard drive? (I read an article that recommended once every 3 years. But if I do get an Airport Time Capsule, I don't want to have to throw one away every 3 years!)

1. Yes absolutely Time-Machine - I only exclude my local virtual machines from backing up by time machine, everything else gets included. Most importantly compared to other backup software - restore is reliable and easy.
2. I got one a very long time ago, don't use it for that purpose anymore. I've set up a Time Machine server on my Synology NAS which has redundant disks. But then that one is backed up to my Drobo where I cycle disks and have sets of them stored at another secure location. I did similar to the Time Capsule where I backed up the time capsule to my Drobo.
3. It depends on how big you need to get, if you can get away with singular then I like the WD Passport usb3 drives. Just have a few so you can spread the risk across several disks...
4. Most definitely - however not for backup purposes, it is overkill and not required
5. About five years, but based on a healtcheck of the device

 

[neil_g]

You other option would be to buy a naz box and set it up as a raid drive. You then have the redundancy that if one drive fails you have the other drive as a fail safe. This works fine with time machine over wifi.

Although remember raid counts as 1 copy as its still vulnerable to file deletion, corruption, fire/theft, some hardware failures etc so still needs backing up to another drive.

 

[wyx087]

Isn't Time Capsule is just a glorified normal Apple router with a disk stuck inside? Might as well buy a more capable NAS.

I backup my MacBook air using Time Machine to my Synology NAS, excluding photos/documents. Photo RAW are backed up on import to the same NAS, LR catalogue is backed up to Synology cloud service on the same NAS. NAS then creates weekly mirror backup to HP microserver. I then create monthly backup of important data onto portable drives.

I agree with others, TIme Machine is not suitable for backing up photography work, you don't have enough control over it. I do find it to be reliable enough to restore my MBA when the latest OSX major upgrade messed up. So I would say it's only good for backing up your computer settings.

 

[dejongj]

Isn't Time Capsule is just a glorified normal Apple router with a disk stuck inside? Might as well buy a more capable NAS.

I backup my MacBook air using Time Machine to my Synology NAS, excluding photos/documents. Photo RAW are backed up on import to the same NAS, LR catalogue is backed up to Synology cloud service on the same NAS. NAS then creates weekly mirror backup to HP microserver. I then create monthly backup of important data onto portable drives.

I agree with others, TIme Machine is not suitable for backing up photography work, you don't have enough control over it. I do find it to be reliable enough to restore my MBA when the latest OSX major upgrade messed up. So I would say it's only good for backing up your computer settings.

Not all NAS support the Time Machine service, so yes I agree but it isn't guaranteed to work unless you know it fully support AFP etc...

What control do photos require that other files don't for backing up?

 

[JonathanRyan]

There's no difference between a document and a photo - both are just data

Well, in a sense because they are essentially 1s and 0s. However, "documents" (e.g. Word files) are very very different from image files in ways that affect backups.

1. Images are huge. If I type all day every day for the rest of my life, the RTF file I create won't be 10% of the size of a D800 jpeg.
2. Docs are easily delta-able. If I change 10% of one I can save the original + the 10% and have 2 copies for 110% of the space. Jpegs don't generally work like that (neither do raws mostly). Most of the time I'll need 200% of the space for 2 backups.
3. Docs are resilient. If I lose 10% of the file then I can make sense of what's left. Lose a couple of bytes off an image file and you're going to be recovering it for a long time.
4. But mainly, they differ massively in how they are created and used. If I want to write a letter to the bank, I open a WP app write it, save it to my docs folder and quit. If I want to photograph a puppy then I go and blast away with 100 or so massive images, 99% of which I will delete. The ones that remain I will probably change a little bit and resave in another folder.

Time Machine is great for dumb backups of everything. If you take a lot of pictures then IMO it's a mistake to back them up in a thoughtless way. You'll end up spending a lot of time and space backing up stuff you don't really need rather than focussing on the 10% you do.

Fun fact: Time Machine uses a sparse bundle format to hold all the versions of all the files. If this one file is corrupted or lost then not only do you lose the current backup version, you lose every backup of every file you have ever made. I wouldn't bet my business on that system. But it's great for letters to the bank and MP3s.

 

[dejongj]

Well, in a sense because they are essentially 1s and 0s. However, "documents" (e.g. Word files) are very very different from image files in ways that affect backups.

1. Images are huge. If I type all day every day for the rest of my life, the RTF file I create won't be 10% of the size of a D800 jpeg.

1. 
   Yet you still need a backup. As such the size wouldn't be an argument for me not to back it up
   

   [*]Docs are easily delta-able. If I change 10% of one I can save the original + the 10% and have 2 copies for 110% of the space. Jpegs don't generally work like that (neither do raws mostly). Most of the time I'll need 200% of the space for 2 backups.

   Depends on your workflow. If you utilise non-destructive tools you are actually only working on the description of the edits you've made and only the tiny little XML file will be backup up following an edit of the original file. Super easy to delta.
   

   [*]Docs are resilient. If I lose 10% of the file then I can make sense of what's left. Lose a couple of bytes off an image file and you're going to be recovering it for a long time.

   Surely a reason to back it up opposed to not include it
   

   [*]But mainly, they differ massively in how they are created and used. If I want to write a letter to the bank, I open a WP app write it, save it to my docs folder and quit. If I want to photograph a puppy then I go and blast away with 100 or so massive images, 99% of which I will delete. The ones that remain I will probably change a little bit and resave in another folder.

Sure I am the same. Doesn't change the backup though Or if you employ a 'pruning' folder, then just exclude that folder from the backup? Or don't have it set to do automatic hourly backups in the background but just at night. Or or or the choice and flexibility is yours. I fail to see the argument again backing it up

Time Machine is great for dumb backups of everything. If you take a lot of pictures then IMO it's a mistake to back them up in a thoughtless way. You'll end up spending a lot of time and space backing up stuff you don't really need rather than focussing on the 10% you do.

As above, so exclude your pruning folder, or change the time of the backup, or whatever....It is only dumb if you treat it like that.

Fun fact: Time Machine uses a sparse bundle format to hold all the versions of all the files. If this one file is corrupted or lost then not only do you lose the current backup version, you lose every backup of every file you have ever made. I wouldn't bet my business on that system. But it's great for letters to the bank and MP3s.

[/quote]
Not fun, and not a fact. A sparse bundle is actually not a file, it is just a directory. Normal directory and file system tools apply in the unlikely event something goes wrong with it. Really no need for that kind of scare mongering and no different than other file systems that are on top of file systems.

 

[JonathanRyan]

Why does every thread about backups get so angry? Chill out. Do what you want. Nobody cares

1. 
   Yet you still need a backup. As such the size wouldn't be an argument for me not to back it up

Totally. I back up files. Quite a lot actually. But not with TM because I don't find it suited to my needs. Furthermore I don't think it's suited to photographers' needs in general. I listed what I think is a useful strategy for a home user above. But really, I don't care what other people do.

Not fun, and not a fact. A sparse bundle is actually not a file, it is just a directory. Normal directory and file system tools apply in the unlikely event something goes wrong with it. Really no need for that kind of scare mongering and no different than other file systems that are on top of file systems.

Scare mongering....hmm.......

Last time my TM sparse bundle corrupted I spent some time looking into it - basically to educate myself about how to retrieve files if TM breaks. After a day or so of terminal commands I gave up and just deleted it. That's every backup ever gone just like that (actually it took a long time to delete....). Maybe it was recoverable, maybe not. Fortunately it didn't matter. But in the same way I won't use Drobo (because proprietary) I won't use TM for backing up files I might need in case I need to recover them without using the interface. TM is a fun and pretty safety net. But like I say, I wouldn't bet my house on being able to recover an arbitrary file from it at any point in the future.

 

[Andy Taylor]

Fun fact: Time Machine uses a sparse bundle format to hold all the versions of all the files. If this one file is corrupted or lost then not only do you lose the current backup version, you lose every backup of every file you have ever made. I wouldn't bet my business on that system. But it's great for letters to the bank and MP3s.

Jonathan, I think you are misunderstanding the mechanism. Sparse bundles are made up of multiple smaller files, they just appear as one (big) file to the user, like OS X apps.
Sparse bundles are not used when backing up to a local drive.

Time Machine operates at a file level, if you make a change to a document or image, the new version of the entire file is stored by Time Machine. As dejongj correctly points out, with non-destructive editing tools, the original image files don't change.

I do agree that I wouldn't bet my business on it, but I would use Time Machine in conjunction with a completely different backup method, never as my only backup.

 

[wyx087]

Not all NAS support the Time Machine service, so yes I agree but it isn't guaranteed to work unless you know it fully support AFP etc...

What control do photos require that other files don't for backing up?

Good point on NAS. I'd personally always go with Synology because of their firmware.

Photos, in my wokflow, are either RAW files or the finished editing JPG. Neither need versioning, but both need to be able to pick out 1 file directly. So I don't see them being suitable for Timemachine backup.

LR can automatically backup to external storage on import. That's RAW file taken care of.
Exported JPEG are already backed up in form of combined LR catalogue and RAW file.
LR catalogue can be backed up with the prompt on exit. That's the final piece of the puzzle.

I guess it's because I prefer to manage my important backups and have the individual files where I can see them, rather than rely on a proprietary software.

Don't get me wrong, Timemachine is great for backing up as a normal user. But it makes me nerves when using it for stuff I don't want to loose.

 

[dejongj]

Indeed, I'm backing up and storing offsite my time-machine backups, including other 'online backups' on redundant drives. Definitely not my only backup solution...Very similar to only a corporate level as well where backup appliances go to disk and have it online for easy restore, and to tape for archiving/backup at offsite locations.

 

[Andy Taylor]

I guess it's because I prefer to manage my important backups and have the individual files where I can see them, rather than rely on a proprietary software.

Don't get me wrong, Timemachine is great for backing up as a normal user. But it makes me nerves when using it for stuff I don't want to loose.

Why not let Time Machine do its thing and backup the "important" stuff elsewhere as well?

Another advantage of Time Machine is that you can browse the folders it creates without using the Time Machine application. This can be very useful when you're looking for a particular file.

 

[JonathanRyan]

Jonathan, I think you are misunderstanding the mechanism. Sparse bundles are made up of multiple smaller files, they just appear as one (big) file to the user, like OS X apps.
Sparse bundles are not used when backing up to a local drive.

Time Machine operates at a file level, if you make a change to a document or image, the new version of the entire file is stored by Time Machine. As dejongj correctly points out, with non-destructive editing tools, the original image files don't change.

Thanks. I'm not misunderstanding the mechanism. I've spent long enough looking into this to decide that this isn't suitable for the way I work.

By far the most important attribute of a backup system is the ability to restore files quickly and flawlessly regardless of whether the original backup app is working or not. For example, if every computer in the house got nuke striked, I could go to Tesco, buy a £75 tablet and recover a file from my archive. I've recovered odd files from TM and it's great. But not for me in this instance.

 

[Winter]

Thanks for all the discussion above, guys. Gives me more to think about.

I have a different question... about pruning, since that's come up in the discussions. As a beginner, I find myself taking 500 photos and deleting 450. I have been doing that in Windows explorer - I'd scroll through my photos using my arrow key and press delete on each photo I don't want. It's fast and easy.

So, I just installed LR trial version (on my PC) and am finding I can't prune fast in LR because it takes LR like 5 seconds to render each image. (I need to see the max quality of each image to know whether I want to keep it, right?) And then when I hit delete, it'll ask me whether I want to delete the image completely or remove it from LR catalog.

That seems to be really slow and cumbersome.

My iMac hasn't arrived so I haven't actually tried it on there, but all the workflow articles I've been reading advice us to import photos directly from camera to LR, but no one talks about pruning (maybe because pros don't need to prune? I dunno). Any advice for me in that area?

 

[Andy Taylor]

Thanks. I'm not misunderstanding the mechanism. I've spent long enough looking into this to decide that this isn't suitable for the way I work.

By far the most important attribute of a backup system is the ability to restore files quickly and flawlessly regardless of whether the original backup app is working or not. For example, if every computer in the house got nuke striked, I could go to Tesco, buy a £75 tablet and recover a file from my archive. I've recovered odd files from TM and it's great. But not for me in this instance.

You can mount a Time Machine volume and browse the folder hierarchy on any Mac using Finder.

Maybe it's not the right solution for you, that's fine so long as you have an alternative that does what you need. Any backup is better than none at all.

 

[dejongj]

Thanks for all the discussion above, guys. Gives me more to think about.

I have a different question... about pruning, since that's come up in the discussions. As a beginner, I find myself taking 500 photos and deleting 450. I have been doing that in Windows explorer - I'd scroll through my photos using my arrow key and press delete on each photo I don't want. It's fast and easy.

So, I just installed LR trial version (on my PC) and am finding I can't prune fast in LR because it takes LR like 5 seconds to render each image. (I need to see the max quality of each image to know whether I want to keep it, right?) And then when I hit delete, it'll ask me whether I want to delete the image completely or remove it from LR catalog.

That seems to be really slow and cumbersome.

My iMac hasn't arrived so I haven't actually tried it on there, but all the workflow articles I've been reading advice us to import photos directly from camera to LR, but no one talks about pruning (maybe because pros don't need to prune? I dunno). Any advice for me in that area?

I wonder whether in Explorer you are viewing the embedded JPEG and in LR it is rendering the RAW image. When you import in LR you can create previews, set this to a happy medium for speed for yourself, then it doesn't have to render the full image on a slow machine.

I got to admin that even on my three year old Macbook Air it is pretty quick if not instant.

 

[JonathanRyan]

Any backup is better than none at all.

Well, it's not. But if I say that out loud then I'll spend the rest of the day justifying that instead of retouching arty shots of granite.

It's awfully sweet of everybody to worry about the idea that I don't like Time Machine but I'm really OK thanks.

 

[wyx087]

So, I just installed LR trial version (on my PC) and am finding I can't prune fast in LR because it takes LR like 5 seconds to render each image. (I need to see the max quality of each image to know whether I want to keep it, right?) And then when I hit delete, it'll ask me whether I want to delete the image completely or remove it from LR catalog.

Lightroom is a catalogue program rather than file browser.

I press X on the photos definitely won't make the cut, P if I want to pick it. Then delete all X'd photos in one go (there's a keyboard shortcut for this) and edit Picked photos. The filter tool is invaluable.

Why not let Time Machine do its thing and backup the "important" stuff elsewhere as well?

Absolutely you can do that. But why decrease the length of history for other backups with the bulk of your photos file? MacBook SSD upgrades are not cheap!

(remember Timemachine also uses your local disk and only backs up to external sources when on power)

 

[Andy Taylor]

Absolutely you can do that. But why decrease the length of history for other backups with the bulk of your photos file? MacBook SSD upgrades are not cheap!

(remember Timemachine also uses your local disk and only backs up to external sources when on power)

Time Machine keeps local snapshots when the backup drive is unavailable, it will back up to external on battery power if you tick the box in preferences.
Snapshots are deleted following a successful backup.
Time Machine is also clever enough to delete local snapshots as drive space decreases. If you want to remove them all, just disable/enable Time Machine in preferences.

 

[Andy Taylor]

Well, it's not. But if I say that out loud then I'll spend the rest of the day justifying that instead of retouching arty shots of granite.

It's awfully sweet of everybody to worry about the idea that I don't like Time Machine but I'm really OK thanks.

I disagree, if data exists in one place only, then it doesn't really exist.

I'm not worried about your dislike of the product, I just want to make sure the OP has all the facts so they can make up their own mind.

 

[JonathanRyan]

I disagree, if data exists in one place only, then it doesn't really exist.

I don't disagree. What I have issue with are illusory backups. Ones that are out of date, contradictory or can't be recovered. Or just plain unnecessary. The simple fact is that backups cost time and money. I prefer to spend a little up front time deciding what an appropriate level of backup is rather than blind faith in some kind of automagic thing that may or may not be suitable. And that's before I tell you the funny story about the firm that got fined £x million for keeping backups (long story short: they had basically been defrauding HMRC of tax. After 7 years they are legally allowed to destroy all the records of their crime. But since they had ancient backups they got hit pretty hard....)

BTW since we were discussing Lightroom, can somebody confirm the current best practice for LR and TM? LR creates huge database files which change pretty much every time you open the app and TM's default is hourly backups. How does TM go about backing those up? Is is a delta thing or a "let's use your whole disk in case you need to undo that slider position" thing. It won't surprise you to learn I treat LR catalogues separately for backup purposes

 

[dejongj]

I don't disagree. What I have issue with are illusory backups. Ones that are out of date, contradictory or can't be recovered. Or just plain unnecessary. The simple fact is that backups cost time and money. I prefer to spend a little up front time deciding what an appropriate level of backup is rather than blind faith in some kind of automagic thing that may or may not be suitable. And that's before I tell you the funny story about the firm that got fined £x million for keeping backups (long story short: they had basically been defrauding HMRC of tax. After 7 years they are legally allowed to destroy all the records of their crime. But since they had ancient backups they got hit pretty hard....)

BTW since we were discussing Lightroom, can somebody confirm the current best practice for LR and TM? LR creates huge database files which change pretty much every time you open the app and TM's default is hourly backups. How does TM go about backing those up? Is is a delta thing or a "let's use your whole disk in case you need to undo that slider position" thing. It won't surprise you to learn I treat LR catalogues separately for backup purposes

Its been a bug bear of mine that Adobe refuses to play ball and make their OSX versions comply to the standards. A concept that Aperture had integrated in accordance to the API's since Time Machine was invented, I appreciate that it could take a little time to integrate but half a decade or more? Really?

I'd exclude the catalog and use the lightroom catalog backup process for it, and have Time Machine backup those instead. Then also make certain to save the side car files and write the edits in those, those are the delta's for your files and with those backup you can recreate anything easily...

 

[JonathanRyan]

I have a different question... about pruning, since that's come up in the discussions. As a beginner, I find myself taking 500 photos and deleting 450. I have been doing that in Windows explorer - I'd scroll through my photos using my arrow key and press delete on each photo I don't want. It's fast and easy.

You can totally do that in the Finder (that's Mac for Windows Explorer). You can also do it from quick look in the finder - hit space and it will show you the contents of most kinds of file. Select several jpegs and you get pretty slideshows and stuff.

There are plenty of other ways to do this but at first you might like to stick to what you've done up until now.

https://support.apple.com/kb/PH18813?locale=en_US

 

[Andy Taylor]

BTW since we were discussing Lightroom, can somebody confirm the current best practice for LR and TM? LR creates huge database files which change pretty much every time you open the app and TM's default is hourly backups. How does TM go about backing those up? Is is a delta thing or a "let's use your whole disk in case you need to undo that slider position" thing. It won't surprise you to learn I treat LR catalogues separately for backup purposes

So I checked and guess what?

Adobe support says don't run Time Machine when Lightroom is running, so excluding the catalogue from Time Machine would appear to be a good option for that reason.

However, another article I found says to keep the catalogue included in backups and to manually run a Time Machine backup after quitting Lightroom.

Lightroom's own catalogue backups are zipped copies of the catalogue. I would still allow Time Machine to back these up. They won't change over time so, will only be stored once on the backup drive. If they're taking up space, delete the older ones.

Finally, the preview and cache files (actually packages) don't need to be included in the Time Machine backup either, they can be re-created from the original files and catalogue if necessary.