If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#161
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.photo.equipment.medium-format jjs wrote:
"J" wrote in message ... You mean that given a spec (like JPEG/DNG) and a binary file, people in the future won't be able to determine how to read it? I find this hard to believe. The file is not the problem, the problem is the media it is stored on. I agree, J. Our history of forgotten formats is what makes the present more solid. We are beyond the fronteer mentaliy. We have today a billion people using contemporary formats. I can't imagine the sophisticated future that does not know how to read any of our more popular format. It's just plain crazy. 78rpm,45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm are all pretty close to being lost. All used to be pretty common. Sure somebody could make almost ANYTHING readable in the future. We can now read long lost languages. The question is will anybody put the effort into it? Let me put it this way. The world knows how to read latin. If you hand a book in latin to the average person how much effort will they make to read it? Now imagine if the book might contain nothing but a collection of shopping lists? It's great to say the stuff can be read in the future. So what? It's all about the effort to read something. A paper print takes zero effort to look at and decide it's a waste of paper. Or to figure out it's something worth saving. Nick |
#162
|
|||
|
|||
"Nick Zentena" wrote in message
... 78rpm,45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm are all pretty close to being lost. All used to be pretty common. Sure somebody could make almost ANYTHING readable in the future. We can now read long lost languages. The question is will anybody put the effort into it? Nick, your assertion strikes me to the depth of my heart. A significant amount of my work is to support non-print media in a partialy federally-funded library, a university library, and while I did create, code and implement the digital storage and retrieval of music for my site, there is much work yet to do. (For those interested, there is a scholarly journal that describes my work in this regard). The problem is not so much to recapitulate the existing media, which is not a big problem, but how to perpetuate the digital versions through enduring backup media. At this time our great support people make tape backups, but you know in the worst case I am not sure that such is the answer. It's a dauntin issue and a humbling charge. |
#163
|
|||
|
|||
J wrote:
"Gordon Moat" wrote in message ... jjs wrote: "Nils Rostedt" wrote in message ... [...] I'm happy to see that industry is awake and look forward to see the results. //Nils Link: http://konicaminolta.com/releases/2004/0927_01_01.html When those people use the word "archival", I hope they mean the same thing Henry Wilhelm does, but I seriously doubt it. Let's hope Wilhelm can find time to be on the case. And you all know that DNG is already available to settle one part of the picture, right? http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html But none, absolutely none of these efforts address the issue of archival storage. One item that came out of Photokina, and from Fuji, was a presentation they made. The suggestion from Fuji was that people should produce chemically printed photos from their image files, since future generations could probably figure out what to do with those. You mean that given a spec (like JPEG/DNG) and a binary file, people in the future won't be able to determine how to read it? I find this hard to believe. The file is not the problem, the problem is the media it is stored on. Imaging formats change all the time. I would imagine some really early video might be entirely unreadable at some point in the near future. JPEG is already slated for changes. MPEG is also an evolving standard. TIFF is somewhat stable, though there was a variation that Adobe used once that caused some problems. All these engineers trying to do more will continue to evolve file formats. Software of the future might not be able to read older files. While something on the internet might still be found, even through some like the web archive organization, the reality is that usually someone needs to pay to keep information on any server. Obviously some more important information will survive. Family histories are another thing, and it would not surprise me to hear of many losses in the future. What is the incentive to keep things the same as they are digitally now? Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com |
#164
|
|||
|
|||
Donald Qualls wrote:
Gordon Moat wrote: Might be an idea . . . Polaroid still makes devices that output to film. I think the best do 8000 ppi outputs, which would provide nice tonality. While you're at it, make them separation negatives (cyan, magenta, yellow), so you can output them on micofilm and have color pictures that will last five hundred years. Wow look at those digital money savings pile up!! -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#165
|
|||
|
|||
Nick Zentena wrote:
Let me put it this way. The world knows how to read latin. If you hand a book in latin to the average person how much effort will they make to read it? Now imagine if the book might contain nothing but a collection of shopping lists? A Canticle for Leibowitz -Walter M. Miller, 1959 -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
|
#167
|
|||
|
|||
|
#168
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
Brian C. Baird wrote: Not really. You can buy new turntables and convert those records analog output (which wasn't bad considering the inherent flaws) to digital with relative ease. It would be nice if someone made a scanner that scanned the grooves and was able to distinguish between intentional grooving and dust/scratches/warpage/noise and output at least 96KHz 24-bit digital audio. Maybe someday we'll have big flatbed scanners that scan everything including DVDs, CDs, and vinyl records. -- John P Sheehy |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
|
#170
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message
... It would be nice if someone made a scanner that scanned the grooves and was able to distinguish between intentional grooving and dust/scratches/warpage/noise and output at least 96KHz 24-bit digital audio. Such technology has been around for a long time already. Maybe someday we'll have big flatbed scanners that scan everything including DVDs, CDs, and vinyl records. Oh, you were joking. I don't get it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sad news for film-based photography | Ronald Shu | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 199 | October 6th 04 01:34 AM |
Sad news for film-based photography | Ronald Shu | 35mm Photo Equipment | 200 | October 6th 04 12:07 AM |
Books on Composition, developing an "Eye"? | William J. Slater | General Photography Techniques | 9 | April 7th 04 04:22 PM |
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash | elchief | In The Darkroom | 3 | April 7th 04 10:20 AM |
Fuji S2 and Metz 44 Mz-2 Flash | elchief | Photographing People | 3 | April 7th 04 10:20 AM |