amazon s3 vs flickr for photo backup

I started backing up about 30 gigs of pictures to Amazon S3 using Jungledisk is taking about 20 days (on low priority). And that’s ok. The jungledisk software is free, the Amazon bill for storing this should be about 5 US$/month, ie 60 US$/year. That’s worth paying to safeguard my photos.

But then I started comparing: Flickr is 25 US$/year, and you get “unlimited” storage. If it’s really “unlimited”, that’s a much better deal. Should I try Flickr instead to backup my 30 Gigs of photos?

5 thoughts on “amazon s3 vs flickr for photo backup

  1. After Flickr’s clumsy recent approach of censorship i wouldn’t trust them that much. Especially when your talking about backups. What if they start limiting their storage space per user? Amazon’s storage is afaik scaleable and not only for pictures. Important backups schould never depend on cost.

  2. If it’s just photos, why not have a great interface on your backup for finding and sorting the photos? There are monthly bandwidth limits (I’ve never come close), but I think 30G might take a 2-3 months….

  3. I have to agree with James. I use JungleDisk as well, and tried to use it to backup some of my media, but gave up because it took such a long time. Your price comparison is what makes it seem more compelling for you to use Flickr for photos in my opinion.

    I’m considering S3 vs Flickr as a photo CDN on a personal project I’m planning. The issue of price and responsiveness is really important, obviously. Interfaces to use both are pretty good. I tested S3Fox for FTP-like uploads. Still not sure which to go with.

  4. One thing Jungledisk has going for it is that you just start uploading that 30Gig folder and a month later it’s done. With Flickr I have to manually upload in batches.

  5. Peter,

    yes, I’m aware that this is “somewhat” old, but…

    Anyway, nowadays, there’s flickcurl which you can VERY easily script to do the uploads to Flickr from within a shell script/batch file/command line, and thus have it run in the background.

    I understand that this might have been different, about 4 years ago… :) But it didn’t want to leave this “uncorrected”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s