If so, how would you go about it?
Most people on here are interested in digitizing photos by scanning them, but what about the other way around? Is paper a more reliable way to store images than the cloud/drives? Or do you have too many images/photos?
Is paper a more reliable way to store images than the cloud/drives?
I mean, paper can’t really fail and lose everything like drives can, but a working drive will never lose the fidelity of the image. Paper and print can fade and stain. Only a flood or fire would truly destroy a paper copy.
As long as the data is properly backed up, I’d trust it better than paper copies.
It’s worth learning from an organization that does the work of preservation of paper on a truly massive scale:
Paperbak?
When I get around to it I will have certain images printed out properly on optical paper.
This is the same technology used to make prints from negatives, the paper can be exposed to the negative or a digital image can be printed to it using a laser.
Fuji and Ilford offer it as archival type of printing. I’m sure many others do.
People wanting to print at home using inkjet can use archival paper and inks but I gave up inkjet years ago because unless you actually print then it just dries up.
I have a colour laser instead but I’d not consider that photo quality.
If you want the best archival quality look for companies that use Fuji’s Crystal Archive paper. Same kind of stuff used with negatives thus same multi-decade stability.