Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dayjob Dave

File Compression

Recommended Posts

Dayjob Dave    0

One of the options you get when you right-click a folder is "Compress X-file name".

Since I'm starting to exceed 90% of my 200GB hard drive, I picked a folder of photos that is 12.5GB and selected "Compress 'Photos' " and it returned a dialog box saying that it was going to require 1000s and then several hundred hours to complete the photo.zip file. I bailed out.

 

If I let it keep going would it eventually get to a more reasonable time to complete the task?

 

Also, if I let it go would it just create a .zip file right next to the original, thereby using up even MORE HD, rather than freeing up space?

 

Finally if I compress photos that iPhoto uses, will it impact accessability from iPhoto.

 

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on the matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get that option. Maybe it's a Leopard thing - I being a Tiger user. If it's not then maybe you have an application installed which offers that option. Whatever the case let readers know. In the meantime I'll express surprise that compressing a 12.5GB file when you have 20GB free would take so long - though it depends how the service you're using works. Tiger's "Create Archive..." feature pumps out a compressed file and leaves the source data untouched - which is what you'd almost always want - though, again, until you clarify what you're using I can't say what the option you have will do. I vaguely recall using it for large files and the estimated completion time came down much faster than real time as the process continued so it's worth a try - though, again, it depends what you're using. I'd also say that you're not going to gain a lot by compressing pictures if they're in a format which is already highly compressed - e.g. JPEG. As for iPhoto still working afterwards, well, I'd be surprised as the application expects the files to be in a specific place and format - one which depends on the version you have. (You have the option of importing files which are not obtained directly from a camera either to the iPhoto library - in which case it creates copies - or for it to simply to point to them but this has little relevance here.) Still, maybe the option you have is like the Windows feature which compresses files yet still lets you access them as if they were not - though I'd doubt it. In any event I suggest that since you've reached that level of disk usage you really ought to think about archiving off any data you don't need on a week-to-week basis - be it to some media such as DVD or even to external drives - and make dual copies if so. Finally, I hope you've got a backup of the data which you're keeping on your local drive.

Edited by Harry_The_Bustard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graham    1

If you zip up your iPhoto Library, it won't be readable from within iPhoto. Your best bet is to buy an external hard drive of some description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
joshr    0

It will take a long time to compress 12.5GB but it will happen faster than it estimates.

 

It will create a zipped file from both everything next to the original thereby taking up double the space. Then you will have to delete one or the other.

 

More importantly if your iphoto library is only 12.5GB on a 200GB drive then it's clearly not the best place to save space and even if it was compressing those files won't save much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ignoracious    1

The problem with keeping all you files on the same drive is that you have a single point of failure (the one drive), especially if you have crammed as much data on a disk as you seem to have. I would seriously consider a payed external photo management solution, such as Flickr or Smugmug and let those services deal with the storage problems. How many times do you watch very old photos of many years ago? I guess hardly ever. So you just as well could store those off-site, next to a local archival copy, e.g. on DVD, and free your internal hard disk of the burden of storing files that are hardly ever read by you.

 

Or switch to Adobe Lightroom or Apple Aperture, which both aren't such hard disk space hogs as iPhoto is. I'm sure you can cut your Library in half by just letting those apps deal with your photo library.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mobilexile    0
Or switch to Adobe Lightroom or Apple Aperture, which both aren't such hard disk space hogs as iPhoto is. I'm sure you can cut your Library in half by just letting those apps deal with your photo library.

 

 

I was amazed when I moved my library over to Lightroom. Is was a substantial difference in overall memory footprint. And so,ooo,ooo much faster.

Edited by mobilexile

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dayjob Dave    0
It will take a long time to compress 12.5GB but it will happen faster than it estimates.

 

It will create a zipped file from both everything next to the original thereby taking up double the space. Then you will have to delete one or the other.

 

More importantly if your iphoto library is only 12.5GB on a 200GB drive then it's clearly not the best place to save space and even if it was compressing those files won't save much.

Thanks all!

I do have an external HD which I use routinely with Super Duper to make exact copies of my HD. I guess I should get another just for photos and music and delete them from my internal HD - assuming they are truly using up alot of space. I use raw format for photos and then create TIFFs for Photoshop. Now that Photoshop isn't compatible with Leopard, I think it's time to rethink that strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graham    1

Photoshop isn't compatible with Leopard? What version are you using? Must be an ancient one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dayjob Dave    0
Photoshop isn't compatible with Leopard? What version are you using? Must be an ancient one...

Yeah, pretty much - Version 7.

I have since moved on to Photomechanic and Nikon Capture NX.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×