Sad news for film-based photography

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.--

In article ,
says...
78rpm,45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm are all pretty close to being lost.

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.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

In article ,
says...
78rpm,45rpm and 33 1/3 rpm are all pretty close to being lost.

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.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

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

writes:

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.

As I recall, someone did this, some years ago. I know that optical
playing systems for phonograph records were developed at one time, too.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

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.

writes:

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.

See http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/~springer/.

--
-Stephen H. Westin
Any information or opinions in this message are mine: they do not
represent the position of Cornell University or any of its sponsors.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

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.

As I recall, someone did this, some years ago. I know that optical
playing systems for phonograph records were developed at one time, too.

One way to do it is to make multiple recordings at the same time, and then
reject everything that isn't common to all of the samples. This presupposes
that the noise will be random, and unlikely to be common to more than one
sample.

"William Graham" wrote in message
news:Srk7d.303671$Fg5.280045@attbi_s53...
One way to do it is to make multiple recordings at the same time, and then
reject everything that isn't common to all of the samples. This
presupposes
that the noise will be random, and unlikely to be common to more than one
sample.

Pops and scratches are generally symetric, easy to 'tween'. It's a well
known science.

In message Srk7d.303671$Fg5.280045@attbi_s53,
"William Graham" wrote:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
.. .
writes:

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.

As I recall, someone did this, some years ago. I know that optical
playing systems for phonograph records were developed at one time, too.

One way to do it is to make multiple recordings at the same time, and then
reject everything that isn't common to all of the samples. This presupposes
that the noise will be random, and unlikely to be common to more than one
sample.

I was thinking more along the lines of embedded noise.

--


John P Sheehy