It's 2022 - There has to be a better way to transfer large quantity of images and store in the field

Pippan wrote in post #19331367
Wow, ~200Mbps is impressive. The fastest fibre in Australia is 100Mbps and very few people get anywhere near that.

I'm guessing that as more folks connect to Starlink, the throughput will drop unless they increase the number of satellites at the same rate.
I have 1Gbs fibre at home (perks of working as a network engineer for a Telco...) and I must say even with 3 kids gaming & watching movies at same time, me & missus can comfortably work from home and rarely do I see the useage go above 100Mbs at any stage for more than a minute or so.

As for a portable storage device, I once bought a Canon M80 but it sits unloved in a drawer collecting dust, not files.
Really good concept as it catered for SD & CF cards and even ran off camera batteries (BP511) but sadly far too slow & not enough storage - probably not enough sales market for Canon to continue developing.

Pippan wrote in post #19331349
Really? This is a map of northern Australia, a first-world country where we do safaris. It shows an area about 3000 km x 2000 km. The uncoloured areas have no mobile (cell) service whatsoever, let alone wifi.

Hosted photo: posted by Pippan in
./showthread.php?p=193​31349&i=i135777769
forum: Data Storage, Memory Cards & Backup

So yes, maybe get a satellite phone. Satellite phone speeds typically vary between 2.4kbps (Iridium and Inmarsat) to 9.6 kbps (Globalstar). That means that your Iridium or Inmarsat satellite phone has a max download speed 25 times slower than dial-up. (Globalstar is four times faster than that…so about 6 times slower than dial-up). If you snapped a photo on your iPhone and tried to send it over your satellite phone it would take about 3 hours to send. Beyond not wanting to wait for 3+ hours to send an image, you definitely do not want to pay for it. At a standard satellite airtime rate of around AU$1.40 per minute, you’d be looking at at least AU$250 to send a single image.

First world, or as Keating said, 'arse end of the world'.
I suppose you would have to be quite ignorant to travel in the NT without swapping to Telstra if you were on another network.
Check the Optus coverage map!

Pippan wrote in post #19331349
Really? This is a map of northern Australia, a first-world country where we do safaris. It shows an area about 3000 km x 2000 km. The uncoloured areas have no mobile (cell) service whatsoever, let alone wifi.

Hosted photo: posted by Pippan in
./showthread.php?p=193​31349&i=i135777769
forum: Data Storage, Memory Cards & Backup

Wow. I had no idea. I was taking my own country as representative for the first world, but I stand corrected.

Huh. That bad eh?

Pippan wrote in post #19331367
Wow, ~200Mbps is impressive. The fastest fibre in Australia is 100Mbps and very few people get anywhere near that.

Pippan, that is really bad! Over here most plans start at 100Mbps and max speed now is 1000Mbps and that is being offered by quite a few providers. It will cost you around 100 euro a month, so it’s not even wildly expensive.

I'm envious. Our attempt to revolutionise our electronic communications was thwarted by a certain media tycoon but as I don't want to get banned I'll refrain from getting further into the politics of it.

Choderboy wrote in post #19331385
First world, or as Keating said, 'arse end of the world'.
I suppose you would have to be quite ignorant to travel in the NT without swapping to Telstra if you were on another network.
Check the Optus coverage map!

Yes exactly. Of course we are on Telstra's network (the map I showed) but the ironic thing is the place to which we take most of our tours, Litchfield National Park, is probably the only place in Australia that has some Optus coverage (albeit very limited) and no Telstra coverage at all!

joeseph wrote in post #19331366
Be interesting to see what Starlink coverage is across Ausy Pippan... over here it's already most of the country and although relatively expensive when compared to fibre, for places with no cell & no copper or fibre it'll give you the fastest connection I've seen (~200M or so)
They do, however currently lock your connection to within a certain radius of location (presumably so the satellites don't suddenly get swamped with connections from mobile sources)

I think they are waiting, in the USA, for FCC permission for mobile units

Although slightly dated, here's a reference:
"Elon Musk’s space company last year asked the FCC for authorization to conduct experimental testing on private jets and with its maritime fleet of vessels. But Friday’s request is for a much broader “blanket license” for operations."

Other countries would also need to grant an operating license for mobile operations:
"SpaceX also noted that, for U.S. aircraft that fly into another nation’s airspace, the company will ensure its Starlink service operators under either the FCC or the other nation’s rules, “whichever is more constraining.""

Currently, mobile ops are a bit large, but who knows what 2023 will bring? SpaceX tends to move faster than most companies:
"“This is for aircraft, ships, large trucks & RVs,” Musk said."

https://www.cnbc.com …t-to-moving-vehicles.html

As far as Starlink, I think the best is yet to come but the road may be bumpy and long before isolated ares have coverage. See https://wccftech.com …ap-over-global-broadband/

RDKirk wrote in post #19331348
Well, I charge more for a commercial use license than for a personal use license, so....

...so one cannot simply assume that getting Cloud service gives you what you need to support remote upload of photos, especially if you have 1500 of them in a single day...you might need to confirm what LEVEL of service is needed.

Wilt wrote in post #19331312
Wondering about speed limits being internet provider vs. storage service, I found this description about Google Drive
"Speed: The upload speed of Google Drive is up to 48 Mbps while as the download speed is 5-10 Mbps. The syncing speed also varies from 5 to 6.4 Mbps. However, all these speeds are codependent on the internet connection speed of the user's device."

Do you have a reputable citation for that? Google doesn't seem to list upload/download speeds for Google drive. I suspect that speed applies to the free version you get with your Google account. Since you quoted it, you must have picked it up from someplace. Citing the reference allows us to determine if the person making that statement actually has the credentials to make any statements. Google has several plans ranging in price from free to fairly expensive. It's possible that costlier plans allow faster up/downloads.
https://workspace.goog​le.com/pricing.html
https://www.google.com​/drive/features/

Wilt wrote in post #19331312
In investigating speed, I ran across another limitation imposed by one cloud service provider, Dropbox...you need their 'Professional' level service in order to be able to upload up to 100GB of data in one transfer! Otherwise data upload per transfer is much much less.

Like your ISP, higher speeds and upload/download symmetry cost more.

Wilt wrote in post #19331543
...so one cannot simply assume that getting Cloud service gives you what you need to support remote upload of photos, especially if you have 1500 of them in a single day...you might need to confirm what LEVEL of service is needed.

"...my mama told me: You better shop around."

Capn Jack wrote in post #19331544
Do you have a reputable citation for that? Google doesn't seem to list upload/download speeds for Google drive. I suspect that speed applies to the free version you get with your Google account. Since you quoted it, you must have picked it up from someplace. Citing the reference allows us to determine if the person making that statement actually has the credentials to make any statements. Google has several plans ranging in price from free to fairly expensive. It's possible that costlier plans allow faster up/downloads.
https://workspace.goog​le.com/pricing.html
https://www.google.com​/drive/features/

https://www.imobie.com …fastest-cloud-storage.htm

In doing a bit more research into Google Drive I found this...
https://support.google​.com …-hours-to-sync-10gb?hl=en

"How long does it take to upload 1 GB?
How long does it take to upload 10GB to Google Drive?
You will won't exceed the 3.6Gbytes per hour, and more likely less than 3Gbytes/hour, but it may still boost the throughput. At 3Gbytes/hr then 10GB would take over 3hrs.A"

over 9 hours for a 32GB memory?!

Just for grins, I have a 500GB SSD and a PATA-to-SATA adapter on the way soon, to see if I can convert my 15 year old 40GB storage Digital Foci unit into a 500GB self-contained CF-to-SSD transfer unit. Gotta test to make sure >32GB CF storage unit is supported. If that does not work, I have another 500GB SSD to go into an external USB-connected enclosure.

Wilt wrote in post #19331551
https://www.imobie.com …fastest-cloud-storage.htm

In doing a bit more research into Google Drive I found this...
https://support.google​.com …-hours-to-sync-10gb?hl=en

"How long does it take to upload 1 GB?
How long does it take to upload 10GB to Google Drive?
You will won't exceed the 3.6Gbytes per hour, and more likely less than 3Gbytes/hour, but it may still boost the throughput. At 3Gbytes/hr then 10GB would take over 3hrs.A"

But there is some key wording at that link; The upload speed of Google Drive is up to 48 Mbps while as the download speed is 5-10 Mbps. The syncing speed also varies from 5 to 6.4 Mbps. However, all these speeds are codependent on the internet connection speed of the user’s device.

John from PA wrote in post #19331553
But there is some key wording at that link; The upload speed of Google Drive is up to 48 Mbps while as the download speed is 5-10 Mbps. The syncing speed also varies from 5 to 6.4 Mbps. However, all these speeds are codependent on the internet connection speed of the user’s device.

...I added more to that post that you quoted, too.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19331393
Wow. I had no idea. I was taking my own country as representative for the first world, but I stand corrected.

Huh. That bad eh?

Levina, it is presumptuous even to assume that a hotel in EU city like Essen, Germany, will support even a call via Skype...while in Essen for a congress, I found that I had to use my cell phone to call my wife because the data speed in the hotel would not support Skype call with adequate quality even for voice.
And during a congress in Melbourne Australia, I could not even get email adequately at the hotel I was in (one of the hotels selected by the congress organizers) and instead needed to go to the hotel in which meeting facilities were held, simply to get email via wifi.