[Sylvain]

I prefer to use archive-grade DVDs and do keep the number of preserved photos under control. The latter is not a straightforward task, but all too important. And if you cannot manage number of photos, BlueRay is still large enough.

Being critical about what we keep is #1 advice. I agree.

 

The discussion has drifted way too much into RAID technical specifics IMHO.

If I may venture into a sharp summary tailored for toni who is having a hard time getting back to our digital craft :

 

-forget about any of the "complicated" RAID solutions you read. Don't step into the 3+ disk business : too costly, too dependent on technological aging. Technological aging here is : 

*x months from now, you can't find the disk you purchased, forcing you into stocking them (horrible costs)

*x months from now, you can't repair or replace the controller of your RAID solution. Controller = NAS box, or NAS software.

My opinion is that it is withing "consumer" reach nowadays, that it is indeed more reliable, but not much more for the costs we're ready to involve in it.

 

-Keep it simple and cheap and follow the density doubling : buy a simple solution and take advantage of the ever increasing capacity to replace the drives (new parts are a bonus) and migrate old data to new ones.

 

-Diversify medium and location : Optical, Mechanical, Virtual (cloud)

 

I'd stick to a working drive, then a tiny 2 drive box of 2x4TB (WD RED drives are quiet, cool) in mirroring, a spare drive and an automatic synchronisation to a cloud service, of your "finished & edited" photos folder. For the cloud, noted by Klaus and absolutely important is "can you upload properly where you are?" If you don't have too much backlog already, I'd consider archival grade blu-ray as an extra. My entire collection would fit on 12 Discs right now : nothing excessive I think. Just need courage and a BluRay writer.

 

Cheers,