16 Dec
2007
16 Dec
'07
9:08 a.m.
As an expert in this area, my opinion is that silicon
sensors have a
long
ways to catch up to film. Both CCD and CMOS sensors
lack in
resolution
and the spatial sampling artifacts Der Mouse mentioned
are only part
of
the problem.
Another part of the problem is archiving the images. Decay of film/paper
photography is well known and incredibly slow(esp. B&W). Digital bitrot
is much faster and not well known. Just ask anyone who's lost a hard
disk drive full of digital baby pictures. I've also seen a lot of
discussion about CD-ROM and DVD-ROM lifespan and it's not good either.
16 Dec
16 Dec
9:14 a.m.
[digital
versus film cameras]
Another part of the problem is archiving the images. Decay
of
film/paper photography is well known and incredibly slow(esp. B&W).
Digital bitrot is much faster and not well known. Just ask anyone
who's lost a hard disk drive full of digital baby pictures. I've
also seen a lot of discussion about CD-ROM and DVD-ROM lifespan and
it's not good either. 
3:50 p.m.
der Mouse wrote:
Cue the recurring data-archiving thread....
One of the few things which will last forever is
that thread. Which just goes to show, if you want
to preserve it - give everyone a copy :-)
Antonio
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.2/1185 - Release Date:
15/12/2007 12:00
1:06 p.m.
--- James Fogg <James at jdfogg.com> wrote:
But optical media is cheap enough that you can create
new archives periodically (every 6 months might not be
a bad idea given the flakiness of optical media). Have
we forgotten the old days when everything was
*periodically* - HA! - backed up with a stack of
floppies as high as the Tower of Babel? That is if you
were smart. People are sheep and lazy these days. I
cringe when I hear the commercials for online data
storage (and to think on the Laura Ingraham show!)
almost daily. Why??? Isn't there enough automated back
up software so you can do it yourself? Can you say
decentralization? OI!
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
As an expert
in this area, my opinion is that
silicon sensors have a
long
ways to catch up to film. Both CCD and CMOS
sensors lack in
resolution
and the spatial sampling artifacts Der Mouse
mentioned are only part
of
the problem.
Another part of the problem is archiving the images.
Decay of film/paper
photography is well known and incredibly slow(esp.
B&W). Digital bitrot
is much faster and not well known. Just ask anyone
who's lost a hard
disk drive full of digital baby pictures. I've also
seen a lot of
discussion about CD-ROM and DVD-ROM lifespan and
it's not good either. 
3:10 p.m.
On Sun, 2007-12-16 at 13:06 -0800, Chris M wrote:
But optical media is cheap enough that you can
create
new archives periodically (every 6 months might not be
a bad idea given the flakiness of optical media). Have
we forgotten the old days when everything was
*periodically* - HA! - backed up with a stack of
floppies as high as the Tower of Babel?
Hm. Big sheets of granite and a CNC mill gets my vote.
Gordon
17 Dec
17 Dec
10:49 a.m.
--- Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
I was unaware the heretofore undiscovered (?) Tower
of Babel nor Stonehenge were repositories of
information. At least not in a strict sense. Of course
a sun dial could be broadly classified as a
*computer*.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Hm. Big sheets of granite and a CNC mill gets my
vote.
But please archive the documentation, also.
(unlike the world's largest hard sector media
(Stonehenge)) 
26 Dec
26 Dec
5:34 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
And enode it phoneticly so the pre-apes evolving from
2001 can learn to read it.
Hm. Big sheets of granite and a CNC mill gets my
vote.
But please archive the documentation, also.
(unlike the world's largest hard sector media (Stonehenge))
27 Dec
27 Dec
11:32 a.m.
woodelf wrote:
Fred Cisin wrote:
:-) Who's to say that Stonehenge isn't actually the documentation, and we just
haven't found the software yet...
I got to (casually) thinking about this 'universal media archive format' thing
again the other week (the concept that crops up here every once in a while).
It got me pondering questions about regionalisation - i.e. should English be
enforced for anything human-readable within the structure of an archive or
not? Will file formats that are able to be tailored to a specific country
survive better than ones which try to be 'global' but enforce a specific
language? Or do pure binary formats beat them all - even if they make decoding
that much harder for future generations? It made my brain hurt anyway, so I
gave up thinking about it... ;)
Merry whatever-you-want-to-call-it anyway!
cheers
Jules
On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
And enode it phoneticly so the pre-apes evolving from
2001 can learn to read it. Hm. Big sheets of granite and a CNC mill gets my
vote.
But please archive the documentation, also.
(unlike the world's largest hard sector media (Stonehenge))
6205
days inactive
6216
days old
8 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
arcarlini＠iee.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
chrism3667＠yahoo.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
gordonjcp＠gjcp.net -
James＠jdfogg.com -
jules.richardson99＠gmail.com -
mouse＠Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA