Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,271   Posts: 1,534,511   Online: 1043
      
Page 40 of 45 FirstFirst ... 30343536373839404142434445 LastLast
Results 391 to 400 of 450
  1. #391
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post

    Digital copying gives the most bang for the buck by far, but with the caveat about readable file formats. Sticking to the photo theme, JPEG and PDF are ISO standards with long-term projections of functionality of 100+ years.
    Which is why I have a few two year old jpegs on magnetic which won't open. Sure I have backups, but still...
    50% of my ten year old jpegs on magnetic won't open; it was 10% of the same pictures five years ago.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  2. #392
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post



    Digital copying gives the most bang for the buck by far, but with the caveat about readable file formats.
    Digital copying of movies? Which is what we were talking about.
    What do you have to back up that claim?
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  3. #393
    Aristophanes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    505
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Digital copying of movies? Which is what we were talking about.
    What do you have to back up that claim?
    Read the earlier posts. The motion picture industry's near wholesale move to digital distribution means that theatres receive hard drives of films.

    That's thousands of copies distributed worldwide. The universal reason for doing so is cost. At one point it was less expensive to distribute cinema via reels. Now, it is in binary on magnetic disks. They would not do so if there was not a ROI on that institutional move.

    The error rate of digital files is probably no better or worse than the error rate of jammed film or poorly developed film or negatives lost by the lab, all of which have happened to me. Analog is hardly a perfect system and has its own vulnerabilities. What I find interesting is that Kodak tried to be a part of this because they saw the commercial need, but management did not follow up. They tried to be part of the market BOTH for analog and digital preservation because both have their place.

  4. #394
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
    Read the earlier posts. The motion picture industry's near wholesale move to digital distribution means that theatres receive hard drives of films.

    That's thousands of copies distributed worldwide. The universal reason for doing so is cost. At one point it was less expensive to distribute cinema via reels. Now, it is in binary on magnetic disks. They would not do so if there was not a ROI on that institutional move.

    The error rate of digital files is probably no better or worse than the error rate of jammed film or poorly developed film or negatives lost by the lab, all of which have happened to me. Analog is hardly a perfect system and has its own vulnerabilities. What I find interesting is that Kodak tried to be a part of this because they saw the commercial need, but management did not follow up. They tried to be part of the market BOTH for analog and digital preservation because both have their place.
    You are wrong on so many, many levels.

    1. The distribution of digital movies is NOT with harddrives. The movies are transmitted from the distribution location to the theatre's harddrive via the internet and/or satllelites. You are blinded by your religious bias toward film, and so much that you actually tell little fibs to bulster your argument. Your comments kill your integrity.

    2. The "error rate" of digial files is nearly non-existent. The copy function uses check-sum logic to insure that the original and the copy match 100%.

    Stick to topics you actually know something about.
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  5. #395
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Which is why I have a few two year old jpegs on magnetic which won't open. Sure I have backups, but still...
    50% of my ten year old jpegs on magnetic won't open; it was 10% of the same pictures five years ago.
    Had you transfered your stock of jpgs to newer and cheaper media every 5-10 years, you would never have a problem opening up old digital content. The cost of digital archival is rediculously miniscle.
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  6. #396
    SilverGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Orange County, Calif
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    739
    Images
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    ...to duplicate a digital media file with high fidelity is more difficult and expensive.
    How is that so?

    A 3TB eSata external drive costs $200. A 1TB costs $75.

    TIFF, and many other LossLESS digital formats are available to use.

    Easy, easy, easy....just drag and drop. On more then one target external drive.

    Keep one at your place, the other at mother's.

    Done.
    Coming back home to my film roots. Canon EOS-3 SLR, Canon EOS 1V SLR, 580ex flash, and 5D DSLR shooter. Prime lens only shooter.

  7. #397
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    You are blinded by your religious bias toward film,
    Funny, I didn't perceive that, as he's been promoting digital storage as better.


    and so much that you actually tell little fibs to bulster your argument.
    That's just not nice. I don't think he's lying, just mistaken.


    Your comments kill your integrity.
    I think his comments kill his credibility (partially, anyway). I don't see any thing that indicates his level of integrity.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #398
    Aristophanes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    505
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    You are wrong on so many, many levels.

    1. The distribution of digital movies is NOT with harddrives. The movies are transmitted from the distribution location to the theatre's harddrive via the internet and/or satllelites. You are blinded by your religious bias toward film, and so much that you actually tell little fibs to bulster your argument. Your comments kill your integrity.

    2. The "error rate" of digial files is nearly non-existent. The copy function uses check-sum logic to insure that the original and the copy match 100%.

    Stick to topics you actually know something about.
    Not all theatres with digital projectors have access to the bandwidth necessary for direct transmission of the master files. They receive their copies on encrypted disks via courier. Regardless, the local medium is a hard drive. How the data gets onto it is irrelevant. The system is far more fungible than analog hard copy.

    The error rate of digital files is there, but infinitesimal *if* a master of 100% fidelity is properly copied.

    And check sum logic scans *do* find errors, do they not? And guess what? Some are fatal errors because there was an error with the "master", which may or may not be the authentic master. For archiving, there is a chain of authenticity.

  9. #399
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    Had you transfered your stock of jpgs to newer and cheaper media every 5-10 years, you would never have a problem opening up old digital content. The cost of digital archival is rediculously miniscle.
    Read it again. I have 2-year-old images that won't open. 10% of the others failed before five years, and another 40% of the original amount before 10 years. I don't really care about those images anymore (from an old job) so I didn't bother to back them up after I discovered the failures five years ago. I'm now just curious to see how long before they all fail.

    IMO, jpegs suck. But my only digital camera now, a P&S, only takes jpegs.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  10. #400
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    You know, recently I released a 2 disk DVD set for sale about Emulsion Making and Coating.

    Now, this is not a sales pitch it is a story about making the DVDs.

    First, the software for the camera is incompatible with most editing software so you can't see the image or hear the sound (take your pick). You have to get special translating software to yield 2 files of image and sound and then these go into the editor. (this is true of many editors).

    Well, once edited, you make your master and take it to a shop to dupe it. They read it! Hah, the errors climb during reading and their software tells you it is either a checksum error or one of 2 other types. If the number of errors climb over a certain amount, the disc cannot be copied.

    The engineers at the shop told me that most common DVD writers made disks with so many errors in dupes that their shop (and other) were unable to copy them. I had to make 3 masters before I got one that had a low enough error rate that dupes could be made. Their software was able to fix these errors but this indicated to me how chancy this process is.

    Almost all disks have errors or create them and only smart algorithms will fix the problem.

    At the present time, I have many PDF files that will not open. They are ok, but the Adobe reader has changed so much that older files cannot be read. I have Word files that com from the previous version that I am using that I cannot read. I get very esoteric error messages that when searched for on Google indicate a "protection" error based on upgrades to internal Word and Office security which has rendered the files unreadable by the new version.

    Interestingly, if I install the current Word on the old computer that the DOC file came from, it can be opened just fine due to the lower security OS (ME vs XP).

    The point of this? Computer files seem to become obsolete or contain many errors which makes it difficult to work with them over a time base that is probably on the order of 5 - 10 years.

    PE



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin