NAS vs SAN for picture and video

[MrMarkyMark]

The argument is that unless the photo is good enough it's not worth keeping

Which means either, he is extremely fussy what he keeps, or he is totally useless at photography.

[eek]

Which means either, he is extremely fussy what he keeps, or he is totally useless at photography.

If you had seen some of the pictures Scooter has posted on here you would know which of the above options is the correct one...

[MrMarkyMark]

If you had seen some of the pictures Scooter has posted on here you would know which of the above options is the correct one...

TBF, I remember the ones he posted here he said he took in Peru, I thought those were very good.

[WTFH]

TBF, I remember the ones he posted here he said he took in Peru, I thought those were very good.

True, they were.

[WTFH]

The argument is that unless the photo is good enough it's not worth keeping

Yes, but you need the storage space to download and view before deciding what's a keeper and what isn't.

My hit rate for "keepers" is about 25%, everything else is either not good enough or too similar to others. I'll then edit/convert those and they will be saved & backed up, the rest get binned.
After edit, then I'll look at what goes into the final output(s). That normally is about 10% of the original.

[sal]

Comparing apples to oranges... I think the OP (and by the looks of it a lot of others) is a bit confused about the terminology and what is SAN and NAS.

NAS (Network Attached Storage) is generally applied for devices that serve CIFS/Samba (Windows for the masses) and/or NFS (Linux for the masses) network shares over ethernet (LAN/WiFi for the masses). They can range from home devices with a single HDD and 10/100Mbps NIC and/or WiFi to Enterprise arrays with 1000s of disks and multiple 10Gbps+ NICs for throughput.

SAN (Storage Area Network) is often incorrectly applied to SAN Arrays a devices that "serve" storage directly to servers over a fabric like FC(Fibre channel), iSCSI, SAS, FCoE, Infiniband. The throughput depends on the generation/quality of the equipment used and usually ranges from 1Gbps to 100Gbps+. Generally this is not something you will see in home, as the adaptors and arrays are quite expensive and complete overkill for 99.99% of the population.

That being said my advise to the OP is to buy a mid range NAS with 1Gbps interface and connect it to his PC/Laptop via switch/router with 1Gbps ports (a lot of older routers only have 100Mpbs ports). This should take care of the throughput for a semi-professional photographer.

Alternatively you can build your own NAS by getting (as Hobosapien suggested) either an HP microserver or alternative cheap server for £100-150 and install FreeNAS or an alternative OS. that way if for some bizarre reason 1Gbps is not enough you can stick a 10Gbps NIC in the server AND your PC. Not to mention it's 5 times cheaper than buying a midrange NAS

[vwdan]

Comparing apples to oranges... I think the OP (and by the looks of it a lot of others) is a bit confused about the terminology and what is SAN and NAS.

NAS (Network Attached Storage) is generally applied for devices that serve CIFS/Samba (Windows for the masses) and/or NFS (Linux for the masses) network shares over ethernet (LAN/WiFi for the masses). They can range from home devices with a single HDD and 10/100Mbps NIC and/or WiFi to Enterprise arrays with 1000s of disks and multiple 10Gbps+ NICs for throughput.

SAN (Storage Area Network) is often incorrectly applied to SAN Arrays a devices that "serve" storage directly to servers over a fabric like FC(Fibre channel), iSCSI, SAS, FCoE, Infiniband. The throughput depends on the generation/quality of the equipment used and usually ranges from 1Gbps to 100Gbps+. Generally this is not something you will see in home, as the adaptors and arrays are quite expensive and complete overkill for 99.99% of the population.

That being said my advise to the OP is to buy a mid range NAS with 1Gbps interface and connect it to his PC/Laptop via switch/router with 1Gbps ports (a lot of older routers only have 100Mpbs ports). This should take care of the throughput for a semi-professional photographer.

Alternatively you can build your own NAS by getting (as Hobosapien suggested) either an HP microserver or alternative cheap server for £100-150 and install FreeNAS or an alternative OS. that way if for some bizarre reason 1Gbps is not enough you can stick a 10Gbps NIC in the server AND your PC. Not to mention it's 5 times cheaper than buying a midrange NAS

Although just to confuse things many SAN's can now export CIFS / NFS etc and many higher spec NAS's can support block level storage....

[stek]

Although just to confuse things many SAN's can now export CIFS / NFS etc and many higher spec NAS's can support block level storage....

Unified Storage?

Like my Oracle 7100 in the garage!

[sal]

Although just to confuse things many SAN arrays can now export CIFS / NFS etc and act as a NAS and many higher spec NAS's can support block level storage and be part of a SAN fabric....

FTFY, not that confusing now

[vwdan]

FTFY, not that confusing now

Ignoring the array thing, because that's just being pedantic - the confusion is still there. Do you go and buy something advertised as a NAS, or go and buy something advertised as a SAN array when they both (on the face of it) do very similar things.

But I can see you're moving to a pissing a contest, so I'll leave you be while I go and do this stuff for real.