Any plans to add an RSS feed? It's not a big deal, they are easy enough to download manually once I am aware there is a new one, but it would be great to add this to juice.
Any plans to add an RSS feed? It's not a big deal, they are easy enough to download manually once I am aware there is a new one, but it would be great to add this to juice.
Any plans to add an RSS feed? It's not a big deal, they are easy enough to download manually once I am aware there is a new one, but it would be great to add this to juice.
Can do!
hip! hip! horray! for BanjoKazooe!!
That would rock!
But, staying in the shelf and loosing quality by just sitting there!!! I don't know.
That would only be possible from the physical deterioration of the storage media itself.
Spaz, have ya listened to the podcast? We're not talking about JPG losing quality through multiple open/save cycles.
Judi specifically said that images she'd saved to CD, that sat around for a few years, then opened up with degradation. That surprised me, but Brad said it's been documented.
Judi specifically said that images she'd saved to CD, that sat around for a few years, then opened up with degradation. That surprised me, but Brad said it's been documented.
Brad, got any links?
Yeah, I was just listening to that bit and I'd love to know the background. I understood that with a digital file it either loaded or it didn't (i.e. if the binary data stored on the CD degrades, then the PC will just be unable to read it)
I'm typing up the transcripts, and I figured out how to make Windows Media Player play at a slower speed so I can keep up. Try it. We all sound drunk. ;)
I'm typing up the transcripts, and I figured out how to make Windows Media Player play at a slower speed so I can keep up. Try it. We all sound drunk. ;)
But Jeffrey...that was how you sounded before I sped you up....mmmmmmmwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!
Judi specifically said that images she'd saved to CD, that sat around for a few years, then opened up with degradation. That surprised me, but Brad said it's been documented.
Brad, got any links?
Yeah, I was just listening to that bit and I'd love to know the background. I understood that with a digital file it either loaded or it didn't (i.e. if the binary data stored on the CD degrades, then the PC will just be unable to read it)
I searched all over for information on this and found nothing. I'm very interested as well since I started moving all my old photo files to CDs. Links! We need the links. :)
Great podcast, btw. A lot of electronic bkg noise on Jeff's line - sounded like someone was chuckling on the line everytime he spoke. Overall a good discussion to listen to. Great job guys.
Okay, I just did a search and found several statements that CD-R discs can lose data over time. For example, this article.
But what baffled me, and still does, is that JPEG files would open but look bad. I agree with earlier commenters that it seems like they'd open or not, but if they do, you'd either see mangled chunks of the image, as opposed to the photo overall just not looking as sharp.
Judi, can you be more specific about what you're seeing, or maybe post an example or two?
Here are some examples. Apart from the not quite lined up Gouldian (in a hurry) you should be able to see the softness in the archived images. Aslo the Gouldian doesn't seem as bright.
I have seen worse before...but can't locate them right this minute. I hope this will explain it a bit...I know these are only subtle...but when you expect your images to be as you left them..this is annoying.
Here are some examples. Apart from the not quite lined up Gouldian (in a hurry) you should be able to see the softness in the archived images. Aslo the Gouldian doesn't seem as bright.
I have seen worse before...but can't locate them right this minute. I hope this will explain it a bit...I know these are only subtle...but when you expect your images to be as you left them..this is annoying.
This would be caused by how you are writing them to the CD, not due to degradation over time. The images on the disk at the time of writing it must have been different or changed somehow. In other words, you archived different versions somewhere along the line than the images you are comparing them to.
This is not something that will happen to JPEG files over time, no matter what media they are on (particularly not on a read only media)
I don't disagree that there's something amiss in your archive flow, but it isn't bit rot. Either that or you sharpened/ colour adjusted them when uploading to the website. Flickr does this, for example.
