Flo wrote:
>On a MOD the data is stored by changing the magnetic orientation of a ferro
>magnetic meterial. This will not fade. To change it very high temperatures
>and high magnetic fields are needed.
Cautionary note: I have a (ferro)magnetic tape cast-recording of "Chicago"
that somehow got too close to a degausing agent (probably a radio speaker).
All the tape that was exposed (that part between one roller and the next,
not covered by plastic) is missing any resemblence to music. Fortunately, I
can sing, hum, or whistle my way through "Chicago" to cover the lost
music--but I somehow doubt that I could do the same with lost photo-data.
Any questions?
Best regards--LRA
>From: "Florian Rist" <florian.rist@stud.tu-muenchen.de>
>Reply-To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
>Subject: Re: filmscanners: Best digital archive medium for scans?
>Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 17:20:06 +0200
>
>Hi Bob!
>
> > I'm curious, why do you trust MOD more than CDR?
> > MOD will probably never become standard nor inexpensive.
>
>There are various MOD standards and some of them a older than CDR. All over
>the world MOD jukeboxes have been used and are still used to store and
>archive digital data.
>
>MODs are definitely more reliably than CDRs because the data is stored in a
>complete different way. On a CDR the data is stored by changing the optical
>characteristics of an organic dye. This dye will grow old an fade out some
>how just like film. On a MOD the data is stored by changing the
>magnetic orientation of a ferro magnetic meterial. This will not fade. To
>change it very high temperatures and high magnetic fields are needed.
>
>
>cu
>Flo
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
