On 13/1/09 05:29, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote:
The optical
resolution of your scanner - say 600x600ppi for this purpose - is the limit
for original capture - higher resolutions like 9600x9600ppi can only be
provided by interpolation ...
Your input is greatly
On 8/1/09 22:29, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote:
HiYa Pete and Everyone,
My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage
Options - is something like this. I've only done a 50 image or so
'test' run to sort out file size and physical process
Hello Dan,
Your suggestion of an iPhoto Coffee Table Book might make an
excellent add-on to go out with the copies of the optical disc sets I
am planning to distribute. I could cherry pick some of the best
images, caption them, and make a nice pre-packaged album. As a method
of generating a
HiYa Pete and Everyone!
On Jan 12, 7:47 am, pdimage pdim...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 8/1/09 22:29, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote:
HiYa Pete and Everyone,
My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage
Options - is something like this. I've only
On Jan 9, 2009, at 10:08 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
On Jan 9, 8:07 pm, Charles Davis c...@gamewood.net wrote:
On Jan 9, 2009, at 7:30 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Hi Chuck!
Topic: Storing Original Prints As Best Option - A Discussion
Upfront! Well Kept Prints Are By leaps and bounds
At 7:20 PM -0800 1/8/2009, aussieshepsrock wrote:
TIFF with internal compression OFF
600 DPI Resolution
IF you can stand the increase in file size, go for more DPI. Absent a
rescan of the original, it's information that can never be duplicated.
I am really leaning towards 1200
On Jan 9, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Dan wrote:
Definitely videotape them. Our family's collection... One of the
most important items in it is a reel-to-reel audio tape of an Aunt
talking about an old photo - then telling a story of her childhood in
Russia.
Garage Band makes it painfully simple
Topic: Storing Original Prints As Best Option - A Discussion
Upfront! Well Kept Prints Are By leaps and bounds this is
UNEQUIVOCABLY The Best Option!
Any and All Atempts To Explain Doing So Is Best Is To Be 'Preaching To
The Choir'.
My Photographic Skils Come Out Of Large Format Cameras And
On Jan 9, 2009, at 7:30 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Topic: Storing Original Prints As Best Option - A Discussion
Upfront! Well Kept Prints Are By leaps and bounds this is
UNEQUIVOCABLY The Best Option!
Any and All Atempts To Explain Doing So Is Best Is To Be 'Preaching To
The Choir'.
My
Thanks for the Support and Sympathy Bruce.
I will swallow my diatribes about 'him' except to unequivocably state
he has forfeited his status as member of the Human Race. There is no
stepping back from the actions he took in this instance. Yet, it's
just one of a collection of instances.
On Jan 9, 8:07 pm, Charles Davis c...@gamewood.net wrote:
On Jan 9, 2009, at 7:30 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Hi Chuck!
Topic: Storing Original Prints As Best Option - A Discussion
Upfront! Well Kept Prints Are By leaps and bounds this is
UNEQUIVOCABLY The Best Option!
Any and All
At 8:15 PM -0500 1/9/2009, John Callahan wrote:
Haven't read anything in this discussion about the use of flash
memory for archiving photographs etc. Would someone expand on this?
Flash is one of the least reliable medias available.
- Dan.
--
- Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth
On Jan 9, 8:15 pm, John Callahan jcalla...@stny.rr.com wrote:
On Jan 9, 2009, at 10:52 AM, Dan wrote:
Hi John!
At 10:10 PM -0800 1/8/2009, Paul wrote:
One thing that never got mentioned was how much storage this project
will use. Are you talking about dozens of DVD's, or over 100?
-
Flash Memory IS NOT ARCHIVAL. Period!
To Over Simplify The Reason - The fast changing materials which
'flash' on and off to store the 1's and 0's are inherently unstable.
For the Memory to be quick it has to change fast, but a quickly
changing material generally doesn't resist change well.
On Fri, 2009-01-09 at 21:21 -0800, aussieshepsrock wrote:
The method the 1's and 0's are stored is inherently unstable and the
1's and 0's don't stay as specified in a durable manner. The 'data' in
a sense evolves on it's own and can't be relied upon in a 'calendar'
based measurement of time.
Ralph Green wrote:
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 21:13 -0800, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Has anyone heard of Taiyo Yuden the japanese cdr dvdr media
manufacturer?
Taiyo Yuden is generally considered to be the best producer of media
out there. They are rarely the cheapest. At one time,
On 7/1/09 23:00, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote:
Original Poster here..
This jpeg vs tiff question is pretty important to me. My personal
experience with jpegs is that the inherent nature of how the
compression it uses works, very little quantities of data loss equate
HiYa Pete and Everyone,
My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage
Options - is something like this. I've only done a 50 image or so
'test' run to sort out file size and physical process considerations
at this point. Some of this is based on some comparative tests of
Comments below!
On Jan 8, 2009, at 5:29 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
HiYa Pete and Everyone,
My intended Scanning Methodology - Seperate from my Media Storage
Options - is something like this. I've only done a 50 image or so
'test' run to sort out file size and physical process
Hi Chuck,
TIFF with internal compression OFF
Photograph Fronts:
600 DPI Resolution
IF you can stand the increase in file size, go for more DPI. Absent a
rescan of the original, it's information that can never be duplicated.
I am really leaning towards 1200 dpi, but aproximately 70%
On Jan 8, 2009, at 10:20 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Hi Chuck,
TIFF with internal compression OFF
Photograph Fronts:
600 DPI Resolution
IF you can stand the increase in file size, go for more DPI. Absent a
rescan of the original, it's information that can never be
duplicated.
I am
One thing that never got mentioned was how much storage this project
will use. Are you talking about dozens of DVD's, or over 100?
Have you considered making at least one hard copy of the whole thing,
for the sake of redundancy and for the greatest accessibility?
I think the safest method would
I forgot to mention how fragile that recorded surface of a CD or DVD
can be. Just a little tape on the painted surface can ruin it. I got a
DVD once that had been taped to a sheet of paper, and when I peeled
off the tape, that part of the upper layer of the disc came off with
it.
I think digital will be around for a long time (possibly forever) so
this is another good reason for a external HD.
On Jan 5, 5:16 pm, aussieshepsrock ilovaussiesh...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi Miko,
I happen to personally 'like' your DNG suggestion and am a genuine
devotee of RAW files and
On Jan 6, 2009, at 10:38 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Hello All! Original Poster Here. Looks like I've kicked up a diverse
conversation here. I think I've gleaned a great deal of thoughts from
what's been discussed and I'll check on the NIST info soon. I want to
comment on the RAW image
On Jan 7, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Sam Macomber wrote:
Since most consumer or even prosumer scanners and software
already interpolate the raw sensor data into TIFF format (there are
some that generate RAW type file, though the cost of such machines is
quite high)
ViewScan will save the raw CCD
On Jan 6, 2009, at 7:36 PM, Vic wrote:
PDF, JPG and other formats, while they might be de facto standards,
are still proprietary formats,
PDF is an open ISO standard, no longer controlled by Adobe; although
Adobe PDF's can have proprietary parts, the pdf created by, say
printing to PDF
On Jan 7, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
On Jan 7, 2009, at 7:30 AM, Sam Macomber wrote:
Since most consumer or even prosumer scanners and software
already interpolate the raw sensor data into TIFF format (there are
some that generate RAW type file, though the cost of such
At 8:36 AM -0700 1/7/2009, Bruce Johnson wrote:
JPEG is also an ISO standard, and open source implementations exist.
But apparently it's not a fully free public standard? You have to
pay the licensing fee for JPEG2000.
- Dan.
--
- Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth
On Jan 7, 2009, at 11:12 AM, Dan wrote:
At 8:36 AM -0700 1/7/2009, Bruce Johnson wrote:
JPEG is also an ISO standard, and open source implementations exist.
But apparently it's not a fully free public standard? You have to
pay the licensing fee for JPEG2000.
JPEG != JPEG2000
Per the
On 6/1/09 16:35, Sam Macomber s...@macomber.com wrote:
RAW format is all the information captured by the camera's sensor in
an unaltered state(though sometimes lossless compression is used,
depends on the camera). To generate a TIFF that sensor data has to be
altered and when you do so
Original Poster here..
This jpeg vs tiff question is pretty important to me. My personal
experience with jpegs is that the inherent nature of how the
compression it uses works, very little quantities of data loss equate
with the Functional Loss of the image. My limited knowledge of the
'nature'
On Jan 7, 2009, at 4:00 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
A further question I have is that the TIFF 'standards' site I was
looking at indicates that a previously 'patented' compression option
inside of TIFF -I believe the LZW option- was transfered to the public
domain -or something similar-
Howdy,
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 08:36 -0700, Bruce Johnson wrote:
On Jan 6, 2009, at 7:36 PM, Vic wrote:
PDF, JPG and other formats, while they might be de facto standards,
are still proprietary formats,
PDF is an open ISO standard, no longer controlled by Adobe; although
Adobe PDF's
HiYa Pete,
thanks for the tip on the 'Black' Fuji media. My only 'techie'
relative mentioned these to me over the weekend. He's been a mac
disciple since the begining having bought like the third one sold here
in Michigan way back when. He's a programmer, engineer, optics,
physics, etc etc etc
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 21:13 -0800, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Has anyone heard of Taiyo Yuden the japanese cdr dvdr media
manufacturer?
Taiyo Yuden is generally considered to be the best producer of media
out there. They are rarely the cheapest. At one time, Taiyo Yuden
manufactured the
along with the
negatives.
Kirk
He who has honor need not fear death.
Eva Marie LeGrand Morrison 5/24/1958-6/26/2008
My beloved wife, and my best friend, I miss you
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:25:18 -0800
Subject: Re: Where do I learn becomes archiving files and images
At 10:34 PM -0500 1/5/2009, insightinmind wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Dan wrote:
From a pro perspective image quality of a TIFF is not good enough,
RAW is much better.
Never heard that before. In what way is TIFF lacking?
I've always heard if you convert an image from one format
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Dan wrote:
At 5:42 PM -0500 1/5/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Dan wrote:
At 1:55 PM -0800 1/5/2009, MIKO .. wrote:
The photo industry believes that the highest quality version of an
image is its RAW version, when available.
Each
At 11:35 AM -0500 1/6/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Dan wrote:
At 5:42 PM -0500 1/5/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
From a pro perspective image quality of a TIFF is not good enough,
RAW is much better.
Never heard that before. In what way is TIFF lacking?
RAW
On Jan 6, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Dan wrote:
At 11:35 AM -0500 1/6/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:20 PM, Dan wrote:
At 5:42 PM -0500 1/5/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
From a pro perspective image quality of a TIFF is not good enough,
RAW is much better.
Never heard that before.
At 1:13 PM -0500 1/6/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
On Jan 6, 2009, at 12:42 PM, Dan wrote:
The direct CCD data (raw) is unusable unless you have a profile
containing the necessary metrics, regarding that particular camera's
ccd performance. Said profile is sometimes included in the metadata
It's not preserving the still images that bothers me so much as the
video---video of our little kids who have grown up or adults who are
no longer with us. I can print out still images and preserve them in
various ways, but there is no printing out video to save it; it's on
disks or tape in order
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Tom tba...@nmia.com wrote:
It's not preserving the still images that bothers me so much as the
video---video of our little kids who have grown up or adults who are
no longer with us. I can print out still images and preserve them in
various ways, but there is
At 11:04 AM -0800 1/6/2009, Tom wrote:
It's not preserving the still images that bothers me so much as the
video---video of our little kids who have grown up or adults who are
no longer with us. I can print out still images and preserve them in
various ways, but there is no printing out video to
On Jan 6, 2009, at 12:04 PM, Tom wrote:
It's not preserving the still images that bothers me so much as the
video---video of our little kids who have grown up or adults who are
no longer with us. I can print out still images and preserve them in
various ways, but there is no printing out
but some help.
It looks like these are good for a long time (100 years).
I am in no way connected to this site or Co.
Wm. Arnold ( Mac's Forever )
--- On Tue, 1/6/09, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote:
From: Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu
Subject: Re: Where do I learn
learn becomes archiving files and
images- the future
To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 6, 2009, 4:38 PM
On Jan 6, 2009, at 12:04 PM, Tom wrote:
It's not preserving the still images that bothers
me so much as the
video---video of our little kids who have grown up
At 2:14 PM -0800 1/6/2009, Wm. Arnold wrote:
http://best-blank-dvd-review.gorungoreviews.com
for Taiyo Yuden DVD's
That review notwithstanding, TY media is excellent. I've been buying
'em in bulk for quite a while now. Can offer some thru LEM Swap if
there's desire.
Taiyo Yuden is one of
On Jan 6, 12:22 pm, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how big are those pre-compression files? Are
you doing this in 1080 or higher?
- Dan.
How big are these movies, these video files? Well, a manual I have
here on Final Cut says: the DV video that you work with in
On Jan 6, 10:42 am, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote:
heh. Just ran across some old PDF files that I cannot seem to open
anymore. Preview gives an empty window. Adobe Reader crashes.
Tried full Acrobat on XP - it blue screens. That's a good example of
how Adobe formats work - even the open
Hello All! Original Poster Here. Looks like I've kicked up a diverse
conversation here. I think I've gleaned a great deal of thoughts from
what's been discussed and I'll check on the NIST info soon. I want to
comment on the RAW image file discussions. It occurs to me that the
proper way to think
Regarding the format of your archived photos: The photo industry
believes that the highest quality version of an image is its RAW
version, when available. The address this, and a global standard, the
DNG format has been evolving and DNG format with the original RAW
image embedded along
At 1:55 PM -0800 1/5/2009, MIKO .. wrote:
The photo industry believes that the highest quality version of an
image is its RAW
version, when available.
Each company has its own variant of RAW. There will be no standard
any time soon.
TIFF is better.
No physical media type (like CD-R) is
On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Dan wrote:
At 1:55 PM -0800 1/5/2009, MIKO .. wrote:
The photo industry believes that the highest quality version of an
image is its RAW
version, when available.
Each company has its own variant of RAW. There will be no standard
any time soon.
TIFF is
On Jan 5, 2009, at 2:42 PM, Sam Macomber wrote:
Each company has its own variant of RAW. There will be no standard
any time soon.
TIFF is better.
Whoever wrote this is a bit rude. Yes of course I know that every
form on RAW is different, which is EXACTLY why you convert it to DNG
and
On Jan 5, 2009, at 2:42 PM, Sam Macomber wrote:
At this point with newer systems they're generally all supported by
Photoshop CameraRAW and can be converted to DNG. i feel that's
reasonably safe since I'm seeling the useful life right around 10
years for an image, I don't see many calls
Hi Miko,
I happen to personally 'like' your DNG suggestion and am a genuine
devotee of RAW files and actively shoot and store them! However, the
archive I am creating is NOT an archive for ME or being created for MY
use. It's being created for two equally important 'future' relatives -
Someone
On Jan 5, 2009, at 4:16 PM, aussieshepsrock wrote:
Sorry Miko, The purpose of my project disqualifies your suggestion for
reasons seperate to what makes dng raw so wonderful. I dearly hope
that 5-10 years from now DNG has the status of TIFF. LONG LIVE ADOBE -
LONG LIVE PHOTOSHOP!
No need
At 5:42 PM -0500 1/5/2009, Sam Macomber wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:12 PM, Dan wrote:
At 1:55 PM -0800 1/5/2009, MIKO .. wrote:
The photo industry believes that the highest quality version of an
image is its RAW version, when available.
Each company has its own variant of RAW. There will be no
On Jan 5, 2009, at 7:34 PM, insightinmind wrote:
I haven't read this entire enormous thread, but has anyone mentioned
storing the data files in cyberspace?
I definitely wanted to mention this but GUESS WHAT! I HAVE
EXPERIENCE! I was storing music files onlinr and then the company
At 9:09 PM -0800 1/5/2009, MIKO .. wrote:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 7:34 PM, insightinmind wrote:
I haven't read this entire enormous thread, but has anyone mentioned
storing the data files in cyberspace?
Nothing wrong with keeping a copy of your files up on a remote server
somewhere. Apps like
Well, for the ultimate in archivalness (is that a word?), to preserve
things for future generations of your family, do what I plan to do:
get rid of both magnetic and optical storage. Back to basics here.
Sure, we all shoot digital now, but we don't have to store that way.
Print out your most
63 matches
Mail list logo
