On Wed, 31 May 2000 CLASSICCMP_at_trailing-edge.com wrote:
> This isn't particularly new technology, but it'll probably never become
> widely used in the consumer sector. Most end-consumers simply don't
> think even a couple of years ahead; witness all the folks who transferred
> home movies to videotape, which might last for a decade
> or two at most, and then tossed the original film. The original film
> would've been good for centuries if processed properly.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Competent archival processing is not easy to come by. Does the guy in the
Fotomat booth know which box to check?
Also, don't forget the dangers/fears relating to nitrate film, nor the
decomposition of cellulose film.
Binary data storage on film is an old traditional concept. Look at the
rapid selector work by Emmanual Godberg, and the later copies by Vannevar
Bush.
Stone tablets seem especially promising for longevity. But there is also
the issue of the society forgetting how to decode/read any media. Does
anyone know any more of the data structures on Stonehenge, other than that
it is hard-sectored, and that sand-blasting is required to erase a file?
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin_at_xenosoft.com
Received on Wed May 31 2000 - 12:04:02 BST