Re: cloud photo options I use Shutterfly, and technically unlimited. I have ~100,000 photos in the cloud. The big selling point of Shutterfly is that you can set up on line photo albums.
They are viewable with any web browsers. You can make them private and sign in viewers or public. My public share is a collection of concert photos. Email me if you want a sample link. I am reluctant to put it on the list. Mark On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 5:28 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > [email protected] > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/tvornottv/topics> > Google > Groups > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email/#!overview> > Topic digest > View all topics > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/tvornottv/topics> > > - RIP Kevin Curran <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_0> - 1 Update > - Will there be a Trump TV? <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_1> - 2 > Updates > - OT: My photo collection <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_2> - 10 > Updates > - Any words on the Cubs' win? <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_3> > - 4 Updates > - Bill Carter says SNL not dead <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_4> > - 1 Update > - "Notorious" cut, not cancelled > <#m_7220630511011314576_group_thread_5> - 1 Update > > RIP Kevin Curran > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/5869c8827bc67069?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > "Kevin M." <[email protected]>: Oct 26 01:04AM -0700 > > Writer on The Simpsons, Married With Children, Unhappily Ever After, and > Late Night with David Letterman. > > The article credits him with Dave's first Top Ten list. > > http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/kevin-curran-dead- > simpsons-writer-was-59-941252 > > > -- > Kevin M. (RPCV) > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > Will there be a Trump TV? > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/5ff6260f26122cbc?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Steve Timko <[email protected]>: Oct 25 09:33PM -0700 > > Trump says No Trump TV. > Trump: 'No interest' in Trump TV; campaign debuts show: > http://bigstory.ap.org/65ad38be95bf42d19f25d041d9df5e > a4&utm_source=android_app&utm_medium=copy_to_clipboard&utm_campaign=share > > > > Not sent from an iPhone. > > PGage <[email protected]>: Oct 25 10:23PM -0700 > > In first episode of the Trump Show on Trump TV, Trump says he has no > interest in doing a Trump Show or running a Trump TV, despite how bigley it > would be... > > > -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > OT: My photo collection > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/92f2b0445f0678a0?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Bob Jersey <[email protected]>: Oct 25 07:13AM -0700 > > As I work towards some kind of post-parents solution in my own life, with > my brother Allen managing the house for now, I've started to digitize > photos I've taken almost exclusively with disposable cameras between the > early 1990s and early 2000s. I can do that with the HP F2210 combo > printer/scanner dad got (free?) with a previous computer... the colour ink > cart is getting low, and I'll get more this week. > > Locations are generally either the Lehigh Valley or NY/NJ. > > If I still have creds at some cloud site for them, I'll follow up with its > URL. > > B > Jay Lewis <[email protected]>: Oct 25 11:24AM -0300 > > Imgur, Picasa, Flickr are all good photo hosting sites. Picasa, being > Google based, should have the least restriction on space. > > On 10/25/2016 11:13 AM, Bob Jersey wrote: > > -- > ----- > My 5YO nephew needs a wheelchair van. Please donate/visit: > http://www.bit.do/GetJackAVan or http://www.facebook.com/GetJackAVan > Adam Bowie <[email protected]>: Oct 25 03:47PM +0100 > > Bob, > > One of my great projects-I've-not-quite-got-around-to is digitising my old > photos. I have a big plastic container of hundreds that I want to digitise > but it's so slow. So good luck with all your scanning! (I also have a whole > bunch on MiniDV video tapes that I want to digitise too, but that's another > story) > > For what it's worth, I'd have thought the scanner part of the combo > printer/scanner should work even if you don't have a cartridge for it. > > Good luck with it all! > > > Adam > > Bob Jersey <[email protected]>: Oct 25 08:15AM -0700 > > Adam Bowie, to moi, in part: > > > For what it's worth, I'd have thought the scanner part of the combo > > printer/scanner should work even if you don't have a cartridge for it. > > That's probably the case, tho as of now only the colour cart should be > switched; black should hang on for a little bit. > > > > Good luck with it all! > > Thanks. > > B > PGage <[email protected]>: Oct 25 10:55AM -0700 > > Bob - I am working on the same project. Preparing to move after about 20 > years in current house - in going through tons of old crap to throw > out/give away we found a couple of bags of hundreds of old photos from 80s > and 90s. I have sorted through and identified the ones I want to digitize, > and am getting ready for hours of scanning on my combo printer/scanner. In > the back of my mind I have been wondering if there is an affordable, > dedicated photo scanner on the market that would make the job easier and > faster. > > Also looking for a good place to keep and share them with family - > appreciate the suggestions from Jay (Imgur, Picasa, Flickr). I am not > familiar with any of these. Aside from the space restrictions, any other > reasons to use one over the other? > > Adam Bowie <[email protected]>: Oct 25 09:05PM +0100 > > I've conducted a certain amount of research into the mass scanning of > photos without spending hours at a scanner and come to the conclusion that > broadly speaking there isn't an especially good home solution. > > There are various companies who will do bulk scanning for you, either in > your own country or slightly cheaper if they ship the photos somewhere like > India. All of them seem to work on a similar basis - relatively cheap for a > basic scan, but more for restoration of colour, or removal from albums. > They seem to use some quite costly high quality scanners. ScanCafe would be > an example of such a service. They'll usually either send the photos back > to you on DVDs/USBs, or make them available as downloads. Look to pay 20c > an image. Of course you're putting your trust heavily in couriers/delivery > companies which is the scariest thing about this. But they handle it all > for you. > > For home scanning there's nothing really there. I actually own a document > scanner - the Fujitsu iX500. This handles paper really well and is great > for documents you want scanned. It scans the documents as fast as the > massive copiers in an office/copy-centre might scan them. But it's really > not suitable for quality photos. It'll do them, but not great. > > Sadly, I think it's a laborious home process if you're not going to > "outsource" the problem. I guess if you've got kids you might be able to > incetivise them to do it well for something. Or maybe it's a dull task you > can do while watching your favourite not-terribly-demanding boxset. > > As to where you save the photos, I can offer a few thoughts. > > Flickr: Free for the first 1TB of photos. This is a massive amount - and > should account for tens of thousands of photos. Obviously it's owned by > Yahoo which is in the process of being sold to Verizon. I've been a "Pro" > user for more than ten years now, which removes ads. I have over 17,000 > photos and that uses less than 100GB, so loads of room. Flickr hasn't been > developed as much as it should have been, but it does allow me to easily > embed photos elsewhere, and you can change the privacy settings as you > wish, including letting friends and family have access to albums even if > they're not Flickr members themselves. (There's also an app that can upload > copies of all your mobile photos direct to Flickr) > > Google Photos (was Picasa): Basically you get this free with a Google/Gmail > account. They allow unlimited uploads if you keep the resolution below 16 > megapixels. Depending on how you scan your photos, you'll probably find > that you can get in under this limit and essentially get free storage from > Google. If your photos are massive, then you start to use the space in > Google Drive (starts at 25GB I believe). You can choose whether photos are > private or public. (You can also get an app to upload copies of all your > mobile photos direct to Google Photos). > > Imagur: Don't know anything about this. > > Amazon: Also has a photos backup service for Prime members. Amazon's plan > allows unlimited photo uploads regardless of size. Great if you've already > got Prime. > > One way or another, if you're digitising your photos, I thoroughly > recommend finding somewhere online to save your photos even if they're not > for public display. I've recently been embarking on a big backup plan for > all my data so it's safely stored both at home and online somewhere. I'm > actually paying for Amazon Drive which in the UK is an extra premium on top > of my Amazon Prime account. But since it's unlimited it means I can store > nearly anything - photos, home video, music etc. (I think most of these > service are a bit "funny" about storing video files you might have acquired > elsewhere). > > Sadly I think in a digital world, far too many of us don't think about > storage properly. I still remember an old work colleague who had a burglary > at home and lost an external hard drive that had all his photos on it. They > weren't backed up anywhere else and despite the drive being low value, he > lost priceless images. > > > > Adam > > PGage <[email protected]>: Oct 25 01:32PM -0700 > > Adam... > Thanks, this was all extremely helpful. I was going to go with my amazon > prime option, but not sure how that will work for family members who don't > have it. Based on your comments I think I will explore Flickr (Verizon is > my wireless carrier, so that makes me feel a little better). And yes, I am > planning on a massive scanning couple of days while watching last season of > Orange is the New Black. If there is no handy and easy photo scanning > machine, I will just try to make myself as comfortable as possible with my > cheap printer/scanner and hunker down. > > I agree about the online backup; we were burglarized two years ago, and it > was only dumb luck (and dumb burglars) that they did not find my home > office (which is in the garage). My daughter lost both her computer and > back-up drive. If they had taken my back up we would have been screwed. I > have backed up most current photos now, but still have so many (thousands) > of important work related documents I have created over years that would > pain me to lose, but which I only have backed up on an external drive. I > should move what I can to Google I guess at least. > > Adam Bowie <[email protected]>: Oct 25 09:49PM +0100 > > I keep most of my files on a pair network drives. Each of these has a pair > of drives that mirror one another - in other words, there are two hard > drives in each device with duplicate copies. This is basically to avoid > hard drive failure, as a basic rule of law for me is that if there are > moving parts in something, it will eventually break. > > But that didn't get around either being robbed or my flat burning down (the > former being much likelier). A previous "off-site" back-up solution I had > was simply a third hard drive which I kept in a desk drawer at work. Once a > month I'd bring it home and do a backup, then drop it back at work the > following day. > > > Doug Eastick <[email protected]>: Oct 25 09:06PM > > I highly recommend the Google Photos option for the cloud . > > I've used Flickr since before yahoo bought it. but now I'm a Google photos > guy . the face recognition is really cool too. > > > > Jay Lewis <[email protected]>: Oct 25 07:54PM -0300 > > Some things I've thought of: > > * Imgur is good for just storing/sharing pics. The interface is kind of > crude & probably not something to be used for "archival" purposes. > > * If you're not planning on printing your pics, you can get away with a > low(ish) resolution scan. A 150dpi scan should be twice as fast as a > 300dpi scan. > > * Buy a cheap(ish) all-in-one scanner/printer with a USB port. I was > given one and it allows you to scan directly to the thumb drive. Load > 5-6 pics on the scanner, hit scan and move onto the next 5-6 pics. > Cut/divide them later on your computer while you listen to podcasts or > whatever or whenever you have time. > > * A guy I know has 12 (maybe more) TERAbytes on his personal home media > server. 6Tb for storage (photos, movies, mp3s, etc) and 6Tb for nightly > back-up. It's pretty standard thinking to have double capacity so you > can fully backup everything. And, if you can, you definitely want > off-site/multiple location storage. > > * Solid-state storage (I.e. thumb drives) is better than other media. > You can't scratch, shatter, etc them like a DVD or a HDD. Also the size > issue. > > * Read the TOS of any cloud service, if you use one. Facebook can use > any media you upload to "your" page for any reason (I.e. monetizing your > content) they want. > > ----- > My 5YO nephew needs a wheelchair van. Please donate/visit: > http://www.bit.do/GetJackAVan or http://www.facebook.com/GetJackAVan > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > Any words on the Cubs' win? > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/3adf8a2d19172647?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Dave Sikula <[email protected]>: Oct 25 08:50AM -0700 > > This could be a case of "a neutral announcer makes each side think he's > rooting against their team," but I have to wonder if PGage and I were > listening to the same broadcast. Buck and Fox couldn't have been more in > the bag for the Cubs (and especially Javier Baez) if they owned stock in > the team. > > --Dave Sikula > > On Monday, October 24, 2016 at 12:00:31 PM UTC-7, PGage wrote: > PGage <[email protected]>: Oct 25 11:00AM -0700 > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:50 AM, 'Dave Sikula' via TVorNotTV < > > listening to the same broadcast. Buck and Fox couldn't have been more in > > the bag for the Cubs (and especially Javier Baez) if they owned stock in > > the team. > > Ha! It is always possible that the bias is in the eye of the beholder (I > admit to lifelong, intense but mostly good natured hatred of Dodgers). But > I do think in this case it is more objective. > > My criticism of JB is not so much that he has a rooting interest in one > team (although he clearly is a Cardinals fan, which would seem to make him > a Cub-hater by nature, and also seems to root for anything involving the > Yankees or Red Sox, presumably because it leads to better ratings). But > what makes him a poor broadcaster in my mind is he seems to have > pre-determined what the main story lines are going to be for a series or > game, based it seems on research done by staff, or maybe his production > meetings with managers and a few players, and does not allow the game to > unfold naturally (and is not informed enough by the full pattern of > previous events in the season). > > So, my charge is that his bias is rooted in this narrow, prefabricated > storyline that he has adopted (whether pro or con any particular team). He > will move off of that if events require it, but he is slow to do so, and > the storyline biases for a long time how he talks about the game, and what > he focuses on. > Dave Sikula <[email protected]>: Oct 25 02:01PM -0700 > > I think we - and all right-thinking people - can agree that Buck is awful > and does not deserve the prime spot among network baseball announcers. > Combined with Smoltz, he's barely tolerable, but with McCarver, it was > sheer torture. > > --Dave Sikula > > On Tuesday, October 25, 2016 at 11:00:35 AM UTC-7, PGage wrote: > Tom Wolper <[email protected]>: Oct 25 06:19PM -0400 > > > will move off of that if events require it, but he is slow to do so, and > > the storyline biases for a long time how he talks about the game, and > what > > he focuses on. > > I was trying to think of how to express my opinion of Buck and I think you > hit it right on the head. > > I remember the last game of one World Series, maybe last year maybe before, > where it was the ninth inning, the losing team had two outs and the batter > had two strikes on him. As the pitcher went into his windup Buck started > into his Series-long narrative in a breathless way and continued through > the pitch which went for strike three. I couldn't understand why he > wouldn't just shut up and let the natural suspense of the situation take > the lead. > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > Bill Carter says SNL not dead > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/483adf1ab6a543c5?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Steve Timko <[email protected]>: Oct 25 03:09PM -0700 > > Check out @wjcarter's Tweet: https://twitter.com/wjcarter/ > status/791036534669578240?s=09 > > Doing well in the demo. I noticed they used Alec Baldwin in the Tom Hanks > pilot skit > He seems to be a good investment. > > Not sent from an iPhone. > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > "Notorious" cut, not cancelled > <http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv/t/546907c2e86befce?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email> > Bob Jersey <[email protected]>: Oct 25 11:27AM -0700 > > The 10 episodes produced will air, and "Scandal" will plug back into the > timeslot in January as planned. > > Ausiello > <http://tvline.com/2016/10/25/notorious-season-1-cancelled- > renewed-abc-episode-order-cut/> > (link) > > B > Back to top <#m_7220630511011314576_digest_top> > You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this > group. You can change your settings on the group membership page > <https://groups.google.com/forum/?utm_source=digest&utm_medium=email#!forum/tvornottv/join> > . > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an > email to [email protected]. > -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
