MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"D. Kent Thompson" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 1 Aug 2001 11:52:55 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
The defacto standard format for digital
>images is the TIFF file. TIFFs are stable, do not use compression, and
>can be reused for a wide number of purposes. If you have a high end
>digital camera you can take TIFFS to begin with,

That's what I always thought as well. Even with our now outdated camera, we
capture at the highest res as a TIFF file and save it as such. For the web
based access project, we convert them all to jpegs for our collections
branch. We try to save an unmanipulated (no sharpening etc.) TIFF as the
original image. But, in general, our approach to digital is more for "throw
away" images really, since we still shoot on 4x5 and run a traditional
filing system. I agree that they make sense for doing online & internal
databases, but when it comes to actually getting them offscreen or using for
anything else, it's a whole different ballpark altogether. Those Dicomed
backs that I was referring to, captured a real 2x2 inch array, at 12 bits
per channel. The file sizes were large (100 megs easily) TIFFs. The output
was impressive, but at 55,000 dollars for the back alone, they should be.
never mind the fact that they could only fit on a Hasselblad...

One other point to keep in mind is the hidden cost of digital. You can tell
yourself that you're saving money by not having to buy film & get it
processed. But are you really? When you look at the cost down the road with
having to archive a database of images. A 1.3 megapixel camera for $300 may
sound like a good deal, but how about one for over $5k (like ours)...in less
than 5 years time. Sure, it's still good for the web based shooting, but not
much else. We have 2 view cameras here, one is over 15 yrs. old, and we use
it daily. We have a half dozen Nikons, with the youngest being bought about
5 yrs. ago. You can use an old camera and still be in a working studio
environment...the common denominator is FILM. It's the capture medium. This
is not the case for most digital cameras...they can become quickly outdated,
much like 8 tracks, VCRs etc...

Kent Thompson,  Photographer
North Carolina Museum of History

Opinions expressed in this message may not represent the policy of my
agency.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2