Looking for a home for most issues of BYTE Magazine

[Fred Cisin]

>> There exist some people who DISCARD materials once they have been scanned.
>> Some people object to calling that "preservation".

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Zane Healy wrote:
> Aren’t these the same people that scan at such poor quality that only 
> the text is “usable”, and illustrations are largely unusable?

I wouldn't be surprised if there is substantial overlap between the two 
groups.  Although one would hope that those who think that digital 
copies are adequate would care about making them adequate.
Admittedly, there are SOME materials where scans need only be adequate for 
OCR. 
Certainly Murphy would hold that the least available ones would be those 
that most need quality scanning.

> Case in point, I’m trying to track down a 150 year old book, by one of 
> my favorite photography authors, it’s on Google books, but the 
> illustrations, which are vital to understanding what the author is 
> talking about, are largely useless.

Hmmm.  150 year old photography book would be just after civil war.
My preference for photography books isusually from about 60 to 80 years 
ago, when publishers could do a good job of B&W plates, and the 
technology of 35mm was coming along.   (Morgan and Lester, etc.)
Occasionally, I'll drive to Carmel to look at Ansel Adams prints at the 
Weston Gallery - "megapixel" just doesn't cut it!

Is there any way to penetrate the Google infrastructure, to track down who 
scanned the book, and where it now is?

--
Grumpy Ol' Fred     		cisin at xenosoft.com