Newsgroups: sci.image.processing
From: Steve@dstrip.demon.co.uk (Steve Rencontre)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!dstrip.demon.co.uk!Steve
Subject: Re: Image file formats and compression
References: <MXM.95Apr24110841@dcs.ed.ac.uk> <3niu6p$f4a@ed.petech.ac.za> <252339006wnr@dstrip.demon.co.uk> <3nrgtn$h6u@lilith.uab.es> <799106610snz@pcserv.demon.co.uk>
Organization: Datastrip Limited
Reply-To: Steve@dstrip.demon.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Newswin Alpha 0.7
Lines:  22
X-Posting-Host: dstrip.demon.co.uk
Date: Mon, 1 May 1995 19:02:19 +0000
Message-ID: <809600812wnr@dstrip.demon.co.uk>
Sender: usenet@demon.co.uk

In article: <799106610snz@pcserv.demon.co.uk>  paul@pcserv.demon.co.uk (Paul Carpenter) writes:

> Anybody who does archives onto VHS as far as I am concerned cannot seriously
> expect to do any real processing later. They always forget that this was 
> intended as the name states for HOME use, viewability not measurability!

Absolutely!!

Even the best VHS is *visibly* inferior to high quality originals. The 
design criterion was 'good enough at a consumer price'. By comparison,
sensible use of JPEG can be visibly undetectable even at quite high
compression.

I wasn't aware of this form of 'archiving', and I'm amazed that it hasn't
made a huge fortune for some lucky lawyer already.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Rencontre               |  steve@dstrip.demon.co.uk (business) 
If it works, it's obsolete.   |  steveren@cix.compulink.co.uk (private)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

