- Original Message -
From: Olga Francois ofranc...@umuc.edu
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 8:01 PM
Subject: Early Registration Reminder: Copyright AI Workshops
Colleagues,
Please forward this announcement to interested faculty and staff:
In recent years, plagiarism and cheating
Winter is hitting and New Year is coming.
Do you need perfect gift? 0rder high qual1ty
repl1ca of w4tches, purses bags from 2008!
http://www.beudyyte.com/
tEXVPJAn
We scan at 3000 or 4000 dpi and burn the tiffs to DVD.
NO need to ever rescan. Images are of publication quality with no to
very little color correction.
All color correction is also done within the scanning software NOT
photoshop.
Ideally scanning or photographing a RAW image is best save that
Hi Perian,
I would recommend scanning at 600 dpi if you can afford it. It's best
to scan only once, and at the highest quality you can. That way, your
images are 'use neutral,' meaning they can be used and re-used for a
variety of purposes.
I prefer master images of archival documents to be
Perian,
Regarding scanning dpi, check the de facto best practices published by
National Archives.
http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/digitizing-archival-materials.html
It covers all the materials and provides an easy-to-use guidelines (page
52 -58). The scanning quality can be varied regarding
All,
Resolution is only half the battle. Ensure that youre getting
adequate pixels along the longer dimension of the image.
8000 without interpolation is a good starting point. Consider
scanner quality as well.
If youre looking to scan once make sure youre using a publication
quality
Ahh yes the magic number of DPI
Here's a few other considerations to add to the mix.
Resolution should also be tied to the details in the thing being
scanned. For Microfilming documents, a quality scale was developed
to ensure that items were captured at the proper level. The UIUC
I would definitely scan at a minimum of 600 dpi for printed matter. That's
what the National Yiddish Book Center uses for the Yiddish books they scan.
It is slightly coarse, but works well for the technology (and storage space)
that were available at the time. Today, I would look at 1200 or 2400
I have not received the daily digest for over a week. Have there been no
messages posted?
John
John R. Bedard
Director of Information Projects and Services
The Minneapolis Institute of Arts
2400 Third Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55404
Phone: 612-870-3268
Fax: 612-870-3004
Email: JBedard
Bravo to Sam (the man with the longest title in Museum Technology) for
questioning time honored advice. (Hmm... Time honored?). There are other
areas where this thinking is being applied very productively, for
example in software and website development.
I know this topic has come up before, but
We talked about this a while ago on MCN-L. Maybe a few times? Always a good
topic. Or maybe I just can't let go.
Anyway, I remember making a case for disk-based storage vs. CDs. I still can't
believe that in any honest estimation, storage on CD/DVD/HD-DVD is cheaper than
storage on really
11 matches
Mail list logo
