Re: Microfilm Digitization
Lee Dirks (mailto:Lee_Dirks@OCLC.ORG)
Mon, 20 Mar 1995 20:59:36 EDT
Message-Id: <mailto:199503210205.UAA13092@library.wustl.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 20:59:36 EDT
From: Lee Dirks <mailto:Lee_Dirks@OCLC.ORG>
Subject: Re: Microfilm Digitization
To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB
Message:
Owen,
>...when we created archival records for a U.S. Gov't agency...
What is your definition of archival in this sentence? Do you mean
archival as a storage option, or as a permanent preservation record
of the original. Will the COM created, if stored in the proper
conditions, last 500 years? Would you feel comfortable throwing away
the original?
>If you measure quality by line-pairs/mm then original microfilm will
>measure higher than COM. If on the other hand, you use....then
>measure by readability, it will be difficult to tell the difference.
The standards which those in the preservation microfilming field are
held to require that line-pairs/mm (resolution), density, processing,
and a score of other specifications and guidelines must come into
consideration. Readability alone cannot and should not take priority
over the preservation of the original image. For the purposes of
access, COM is a suitable substitute for the original. For the
purpose of preservation, the resolution and bibliographic issues
would not point to COM as a preferred medium.
-Lee Dirks, Preservation Resources/Bethlehem, PA/(800) 773-7222