Presuming that C1 supports DNG files, it takes very little effort to use DNG Converter and batch convert all the uncompressed DNGs to compressed DNGs before adding them into C1. If the file size drops by half, it means that you have that much longer to go before you need to clear space on your working or archive storage drives, that's all, and that backups go faster as well.
Wasting space in the context of saying "I don't compress the files because I can easily afford a bigger storage drive and don't want to take the time" is the same kind of waste as saying "I'll drive a big gas guzzling car because gasoline is cheap enough that I don't care." I find that is unacceptable from a philosophical standpoint and strive not to participate in waste of that sort, that's all.
G
Godfrey:
I am sorry you find that offensive, but you really took a leap there and made it a bit personal. While I would prefer to presume good intent here, you make it difficult with your holier-than-thou implicit accusation. You only know a little about me, so instead you choose to presume much to mount your soapbox.Your analogy is actually very weak; a larger, more electrically efficient hard drive array is hardly the same thing as driving a gas guzzling car to do the same thing that one could do with a more efficient vehicle assuming roughly equivalent payloads; if anything, it’s more likely the inverse, and as a software/hardware person, you may already know that.
Further, your assumption about my wasteful attitude couldn’t be more incorrect; for one thing, while I realize fossil fuels here in the States are cheap in the abstract, especially for their energy capacity, I don’t find the cash it takes to buy them cheap at all and so I do not take gasoline profligacy lightly. Like you, I am retired, a legacy of the 50s, and like you (but maybe not) have finite resources I need to steward for the rest of my life. My entire home is run on solar (not net-metering). I pick appliances and computer/network components based on efficiency. I buy more storage space than I need at the primary stage so I can deploy it for backup purposes. I have had more than one CIO/CTO tell me that larger drives are
more efficient, and to buy the largest I could afford. I realize one could make an argument that the larger hard drives themselves represent a manufacturing expenditure somewhere that marginally consumes more resources, but I doubt it can be parsed between smaller and larger drives in a home.
I do all these things because they actually save me TCO money; that they may be comparatively good things to do for the environment is a benefit, but not the first reason. I will actually get to a net gain on my solar investment in the next year or two, and since I live in the boonies, I am not contributing much to solar panel heating.
As for how I am willing to spend my time, thank goodness I still get to decide how to do that and am not subject to someone else’s morality standards. As do you!
If I have misread the pointedness of your philosophical comments, I hope you will forgive me. But your disdain was apparent and did not leave much doubt.
P.S. I decided to run a test on NEF and IIQ RAW files. I ran it on my iMac Pro; it’s an 18-core machine and I used its internal 4tb drive for the test. On average, without an embedded original RAW file, NEF files from the Z7 were reduced by 16%. Not trivial but hardly “by half.”
IIQ files were reduced by about 8% without embedding, not trivial but not very significant. No surprise but IIQ files converted with embedding blossomed in size by over 100%. But if I choose to archive in DNG in the future, that is probably what I would do. It took my iMac just over 10 minutes with embedding, 9 minutes without, to convert a folder of 463 IIQ files ranging from about 100mb to 130mb each. Not a huge time investment, but also not zero. And again it’s my choice whether to use my time that way.
Greg