Storage Magazine has returned with an online edition

Although the dead-tree version of TechTarget’s excellent Storage Magazine is no more, the company today released the premiere issue of its online counterpart! Available as both a web-based magazine and a PDF download, Storage Magazine Online continues with many of the same editors and writers, including Rich Castagna at the helm.

You can still subscribe to the online edition too, so you needn’t miss an issue! Existing qualified subscribers should receive an email today outlining the shift from paper to bits.

One article I’d personally like to highlight is my own piece on consolidated archiving. I put a great deal of effort into the article, and I welcome your comments!

I wish the TechTarget all the best with this transition, and urge you all to check out their work. Now if they would only add all of the back issues as downloadable PDFs as well!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Introducing Storage Magazine Online!
This post was categorized as Enterprise storage, Personal, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

First, consider whether to store records as atoms or bits. You can convert paper to data or vice versa, and there are pros and cons to both:

• Properly handled physical (paper or film) records should last for hundreds of years and can remain readable without software or devices. But they’re hard to search (you need an index), and paper is bulky, heavy, and difficult to work with.
• Digital records can either be stored offline or kept “alive,” but questions remain about their long-term reliability and readability. Living records can be easy to search and use, and digital storage can be very space-efficient, but data tends to pile up “out of sight.”

Long-term storage of records on physical media is proven – think about papyrus, tablets, gold or nickel discs, film, and paper. But will digital media fare as well? Data tapes and disks can degrade over time, and manufacturer reliability specs are based on accelerated testing, not actual experience. Regardless of media type, careful handling can extend media life.

But will you still be able to read it? Tapes and optical disks require additional hardware to read, while disk drives are paired with their read heads. Software applications are needed to read and interpret data (backup, archiving, compression, encryption, deduplication, database) as well. What about content format? Should you use ASCII, XML, PDF/A?

I’ll be presenting a webinar on this topic tomorrow, Wednesday, December 3, at 2:00 PM Eastern time. Register on-line at the AIIM web site and join me for the discussion!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Long-Term Versus Longer-Term Archiving
This post was categorized as Enterprise storage, Personal. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

But one thing bugged me. I use an HP Photosmart C6180 all-in-one scanner/printer/fax/copier, and while it works well, its scans are huge. I mean massive. A single-page color PDF scan of a recent magazine article I wrote became a 6.1 MB PDF file!

Then I noticed the “Reduce File Size” Quartz filter in the “Save As” dialog box. “Cool” I thought, “OS X will automatically reduce the file size for me!” Not so fast, though – although this filter did reduce the file size to just 36 KB, it also made the text unreadable! I needed a better solution…

This post is part of my series focused on Apple OS X tips and tricks.

• Access NTFS Volumes On Your Mac
• Clean Up Your Mac! Essential OS X Tidiness Tools and Techniques
• How To Move OS X Time Machine Backups To A New Disk
• Hallelujah! OS X Can Reduce PDF File Size!
• Custom Drive Icons in Mac OS X
• OS X Custom Drive Icons 2: Boot Camp and NTFS

Look what the generic "Reduce File Size" Quartz filter in OS X did to my document - it may have reduced the size from 6.1 MB to 36 KB, but it's unreadable!

So I soldiered on, trying to tweak the scanner’s settings to produce smaller files. But they were still multi-megabyte files. I was stumped.

But the other day, I decided to try again to find a solution. And hallelujah! A solution I have found!

It turns out that you can set up your own custom Quartz filters in OS X – it’s just not obvious how to do it. Buried in the Color Sync utility is a tab called Filters.

Here, I discovered why the default “Reduce” filter looked so bad. My scans were in TIFF format, which looks great but is basically uncompressed. When you apply the “Reduce” filter, it converted any images it found to JPEG format, which dramatically reduced the image size. But it also scaled the images down to a miniscule 512×128 pixels! This is fine for the average inline illustration but terrible for a full-page image like a scanned document!

So, following the directions I found at hoboes.com, I created my own filter. Mine is exactly the same as the generic Reduce filter in that it converts images to medium-compressed JPEG, but I skip the image re-sampling so it keeps its native resolution. The result is a Quartz filter that reduces the size of scanned images but leaves them looking good enough to read or print. See the results below for yourself!

By skipping the image scaling I was able to reduce the 6.1 MB file to 468 KB while maintaining readability

Then I got thinking – what if I turned the JPEG quality down to minimum? The results still looked pretty good – my 6.1 MB file was now 196 KB and looked just about as good as the original for casual viewing.

By turning the JPEG quality to minimum, I reduced the file size to just 196 KB!

So I’m happy. I can again scan and email smaller files. I just wish Quartz supported an open format like PNG! And I wish the HP printer wouldn’t constantly disappear from both OS X and Vista, but that’s another story for another day.

Update: More info on creating a Quartz filter and formatting documents for the iPhone.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Hallelujah! OS X Can Reduce PDF File Size!
This post was categorized as Apple. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.