[AT] Digital Archiving

Larry Goss rlgoss at insightbb.com
Tue Mar 31 15:05:49 PDT 2009


Ah, that's very true if you are modifying the image database, renaming the file, and saving it in order to maintain a paper-trail,  but when you work with the header file instead, there is none of that  -- NONE of that.  I don't bother with filenames on digital images.  I let the operating system and the digital camera assign filenames to images as it sees fit.  I have no need for any names more specific than folder or collection names.  Individual images are kept track of visually within a collection, and the operating system will keep from duplicating existing filenames.

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: Bob W <rgw13 at bellsouth.net>
Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 16:35
Subject: Re: [AT] Digital Archiving
To: 'Antique tractor email discussion group' <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>

> I was under the impression that with JPEG there would be a 
> certain amount of
> loss with repeated saves, and this did not happen with tiff. I 
> do realize
> the size of the file is considerably bigger with tiff. 
> 
> Bob W
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Larry Goss
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 4:49 PM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> Subject: Re: [AT] Digital Archiving
> 
> 
> Define "best."
> 
> For those who want no compression, true fidelity to the original 
> image, and
> some other features, there is no substitute for TIFF.  But I'm more
> concerned about a virtual paper-trail.  As such, I can work in 
> the header of
> JPEG (rather than the actual image database) and be perfectly 
> content even
> though I know there are compromises being made behind the scenes.
> 
> Larry
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob W <rgw13 at bellsouth.net>
> Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 13:45
> Subject: Re: [AT] Digital Archiving
> To: 'Antique tractor email discussion group' 
> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> 
> > Larry,
> > 
> > Just a simple question. Is tiff the best format for 
> "archiving" 
> > digitalpictures?  This may have been already discussed but 
> > I missed it if it has
> > been.
> > 
> > Bob W
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> > [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of 
> Larry Goss
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 1:35 PM
> > To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> > Subject: Re: [AT] Digital Archiving
> > 
> > The maxim is: If it has been stored digitally, it hasn't been 
> > archived.
> > That used to be true, and if you consider standard archiving 
> > techniques, it
> > still is.  But when you consider the possibility of 
> distributed 
> > storage of
> > multiple copies with purposeful media migration as a method of 
> > archiving,then other techniques become possible and the 
> > "dangers" of electronic
> > storage are minimized.
> > 
> > This is not an easy paradigm shift for people to accept, and 
> it 
> > opens up all
> > sorts of other questions that we don't want to have to deal 
> > with.  For
> > instance, the original document is going to eventually turn to dust
> > regardless of how you protect it and preserve it.  When that 
> > inevitabledeterioration happens, does that mean that you have 
> to 
> > destroy all the
> > digital copies as though the original had never existed?  Archive
> > organizations and libraries are having a difficult time 
> > answering that
> > question.  All you have to do is look at the expense and 
> efforts 
> > that are
> > being expended by Trinity College in Dublin to preserve and 
> > protect The Book
> > of Kells or by the various libraries that have original copies 
> > of Gutenberg
> > Bibles to see the extent organizations will go to.  But for 20 
> > bucks I
> > purchased a CD that contains the whole Book of Kells plus 
> videos 
> > showing its
> > history and the technology of illuminated manuscripts.  Would 
> > that digital
> > copy be subject to recall if the original Book of Kells became 
> > non-existent
> > for whatever reason?
> > 
> > To bring this discussion back to tractors, is it acceptable to 
> > generate a
> > restored tractor?  What percentage of original parts do you 
> have 
> > to have
> > before you have to agree that is no longer the same tractor?
> > 
> > Larry
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT mailing list
> > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> 



More information about the AT mailing list