![]() Riecks has written several blog posts for the Signal about photometadata and about processing digital photos.īelow are the comments from all three people. Wheeler has also written several blog posts for the Signal about scanning and photo digitization.ĭavid Riecks, the other expert, is a photographer, co-founder of Controlled Vocabulary and. The commenter raised some intriguing issues and I asked two digital photo experts to respond to his concerns.īarry Wheeler, one of the experts who responded, is a photographer, staff member of the Library of Congress and one of the digital photograph preservation researchers for the Federal Agencies Digitization Guidelines Initiative. Recently we received a comment at the Signal in response to a blog post in which the commenter expressed concerns about our ppi/dpi resolution recommendation. But there are some general guidelines a consumer can follow. The answer is, “it depends.” It depends on the quality of the original photo, whether higher dpi/ppi would display more detail or grainy dust, whether you scan a print or a negative and other factors. In our Library of Congress digital preservation resources we recommend 300 dpi/ppi for 4×8, 5×7 and 8×10 photos but why not 1000 dpi/ppi? 2,000 dpi/ppi? 10,000 dpi/ppi? Is there a threshold beyond which the pixel density is of little or no additional value to us? Isn’t “more” better? The possibility invites the question: shouldn’t we save our digital photos at the highest resolution possible just in case there’s a way to make the blurry ones crisp? With digital photos, for instance, would it be possible someday to generate perfectly sharp high-density, high-resolution photos from blurry or low-resolution digital originals? Probably not but who knows? The technological future is unpredictable. Preserving digital stuff for the future is a heavy responsibility.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |