> Preserving data is not like preserving a paining, we dont care about the
> image or the form as we can change it as needed.
No, it's just the other way, if a painting is aging (beside
real damage) nobody cares. The 'experts' even praise the
quality - the best example is the Sistine Capel - Everybody
told us that this dark thing was the intention, but now,
after a closer look it reveals tat anything we had seen was
aged 'till destruction thru smoke et.al. - after restauration
this masterpeace is now rainbow coloured like a NYC garfity.
Its the other way - we care about the content, an art
galery doesn't care. They just want to have the thing.
Especialy since the 'working' condition of an art thing
isn't as easy to determinate as of an computer.
> Photographic film has shown remarkable life, it's a possible media for
> many decades.
Only if you dont compare with an unaged copy (almost
impossible :) But you could do a test - take a picture
digitalize it and them wait 20 years (and keep your
digital copy always readabe (I don't think I'll have
to mention to preserve the equipment)).
Gruss
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Received on Wed Jun 24 1998 - 10:48:29 BST