How many 35mm jpeg slides will fit on a 700mb CD

[Ken Head]

Depends on the resolution,size and compression you need/want. For the web at 72 ppi you could get maybe 7000+.

[brent bertram]

And if you scan them at 2400 ppi and save them as a TIF file, they'd be about 40 MB each . A lot of variables , Helen . Just like the rest of this stuff <G> .

:-)

Brent

[Richard Coencas]

Helen,

You need to think about what purpose you are archiving them for. If you want quality scans that can be printed at 8x10 inches, then Brent's numbers of 2400ppi as Tif or PSD is best. If you are planning for Web, I'd still do at least 300ppi, since you probably want to display them at 4x original size at least, if not more (i.e. 72ppi x 4 = 288 rounded off to 300).

Rich

[Chuck Snyder]

Helen, the number with the s is time in seconds it's estimated it would take
for someone with a 28.8 kbps modem to download that image. You can safely
ignore that and look only at the number marked k, which is the size of the
resultant JPEG images in kbytes. If you take an average of 300kb (based on
a rough average of the ones you've described here) that would give you 2,300
(!) images that could fit on your CD.

Chuck

[Bert Bigelow]

It also depends on what quality level you choose for the JPEG. This can make a huge difference in file size. For slideshows or the web, Medium quality is usually good enough.
Bert

[Beth Haney]

Helen, you've never said how many slides you have to scan. Keep in mind that you don't want to wind up "penny wise and pound foolish." It will take you quite a while to scan each slide at a resolution of 1200ppi. If I were you, I'd be more concerned about the quality of your job instead of the quantity. And why are you limited to one 700MB CD? Could you not save fewer images at a good quality than many at poor?

[Derek Powles]

Helen, I go along with Rich on this one. CD-R discs are cheap enough and you may want to use the images for different purposes, you can always reduce the image resolution/size later on. If you end up with a lot of Cds you can always use an Album type software with thumbnail images to do quick searches.
Derek

[Chuck Snyder]

Derek, are you using Photoshop Album (or some other software) to do what you
describe? I've been using PSAlbum for the images I've been piling up on my
hard drive, but now that I'm faced with having to remove some of them to
free up space, I guess I'm going to have to go back and 'Albumize' all the
copies I've made on CD's (which were not made with Album, BTW) .... Have
been putting off facing up to that task, but it's coming soon....

Chuck

[Chuck Snyder]

Bert, you've given me the motivation to get after it, although I shudder to
think of retagging all those images....

I guess an alternative would be to continue putting them into Album via the
HD to create the thumbnails, then zap them from the HD; the address that
remains behind would direct me to the right CD...?

Aahh.....I probably oughta just bite the bullet and do it right, huh?

:-)

Chuck

p.s. Will have a libation or two while doing it, of course....!!

[Chuck Snyder]

Bert, it's already Happy Hour here in Texas! You're behind...
:-)
Chuck

[brent bertram]

Bert,
Take a look at my backup solution, <http://home.comcast.net/~brentb636/caddyDrives.jpg> .

I use removeable IDE drives, in caddies , to back up massive amounts of data. I only spin the drive up when I want to use it ( refresh them in Device Manager just like a SCSI drive ) . The whole caddy and tray is only about $30, and you know how drive prices are dropping. The drives are much faster than an external drive configuration ( unless you've got scsi externals ) . Right now , I have a 40 GB drive I use for boot disk "ghosting", and a 120 GB drive for important images.

:-)

Brent

[Bert Bigelow]

Brent,
Thanks! That's a slick setup. I didn't even know about caddys...except the rolling type. <G>
You prompted another question I had. I assume external drives are slower (except for SCSI or SCSI-2 or whatever it's called) but I didn't know HOW much slower.
Firewire and USB 2.0 are both in the 400-500 Kbits/sec. range as I recall. I don't know how that compares to an IDE drive.
For example: Our local hi-tech discount store, Fry's has an ad today for a Western Digital 120GB HD "Ultra DMA/100 7200 RPM, 8.9ms access time." $128 less $50 mail-in rebate. That's darn cheap. I know external drives are more expensive, but I was thinking that with a 1.8Ghz P4 "heater" in the box, plus CD-R, CD-RW and floppy, it might be getting a bit congested and warm in there if I ad another internal drive.
A final thought. Since the new drive will be used primarily as a sort-of online archival storage, access time may not be that critical.
Whaddaya think?
Bert

[brent bertram]

Well, I'm cheap ! <G> I also have and external USB2 box that I can put an IDE drive into on demand, but its much more expensive than the caddies. The caddy drive is only in my pc for the backup time, so internal heating isn't a problem like it might be , were it continuously running.

If you go with an external USB solution, you might try a "mirroring " program like QuikSync from Iomega . It can keep your images duplicated in a second location, and in that case, the speed of the external drive wouldn't be a factor.

Cheap IDE hard drives gives us a lot of options, buddy !

:-)

Brent

[Chris French]

I would just plug the connect up the old drive in the new box - and then
either copy the files over or just continue to use the drive (ok no good
for those who don't feel happy rummaging in their machines)
--
Chris French