Re: information contained in surrogates

From: Bob Savage (bsavage@STANFORD.EDU)
Date: Wed May 30 2001 - 15:39:05 CDT

  • Next message: Mark Jordan: "Re: information contained in surrogates"

    Message-Id: <200105302039.NAA17726@dns.ccit.arizona.edu>
    Date:         Wed, 30 May 2001 13:39:05 -0700
    From: Bob Savage <mailto:bsavage@STANFORD.EDU>
    Subject:      Re: information contained in surrogates
    To: mailto:IMAGELIB@LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
    

    <pre> I was actually going to bring this issue up in a different way: I think the
    "information" an image contains depends on your needs when you look at it. For example, if you are talking about a surrogate for an old photograph, you might be looking at the overall composition, or identifying subject matter, or you might be looking at it from a more technical perspective, in which case the information that is really relevant might be the "crackling" characteristic of aged albumen prints. Each of these three levels of information require that the surrogate capture more detail of the original, than the previous level did.

    If you are digitizing a previous surrogate (as is the case in Rebecca Moss's comment below) you don't want to capture "too much" information, because you would be capturing information about the previous surrogate that would be misleading.

    On the other hand, if you are capturing information about the original print, you should probably determine the amount of information to capture based on your intended use of the digital surrogate. Finally if you need to err, I would recommend erring on the side of too much information captured from the original, because a surrogate that forces users to frequently go back and rehandle the original is useless, or possibly even more harmful, because it might encourage increased interest in a collection, with resultant increased handling of the originals.

    Bob Savage
    ----------------------------- Media Preservation Unit Stanford University Libraries mailto:bsavage@stanford.edu

    -----Original Message----- From: IMAGELIB [mailto:mailto:IMAGELIB@LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]On Behalf Of Rebecca Anne Moss Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 12:07 PM To: mailto:IMAGELIB@LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU Subject: Re: information contained in surrogates

    Hi all,

    Just to let you know that we in the Slide Library business tend to make our largest file size 18 MB because the top file size on the Photo Cd is roughly 2,000 x 3,000 pixels (about 18 MB). After that, the scans start capturing information about the surface of the slide, rather than the image.

    Rebecca

    --
    Rebecca Anne Moss
    Director of Visual Resources
    Department of Art History
    University of Minnesota
    mailto:mossx014@tc.umn.edu
    612.624.2064
    

    </pre>



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 30 2001 - 15:40:56 CDT