> You could burn 'em onto
> 100-odd CDs, or even 17 DVDs (probably the most practical solution,
> realistically) but neither is very practical.
>
Why impractical? Reference number each cd, keep a jpeg on
disk, backed up to another cd, with a reference list of
which cd it's on and an image catalog for easy access.
Storing cds takes some room but not all that much. If it
really is an archive you woudn't need to actually access to
the cds very often, but that access would be pretty quick.
You'll want to make dupes of the cds and preferably store
them off-site but that's not all that big a matter. As was
suggested, this seems to be even easier as DVD writers and
media become cheaper, as they are now becoming. With cheaper
DVDs the project of making this archive for 4000 dpi scans,
even 3500 4000-dpi 16-bit scans (that's how I archive my
real keepers), starts becoming possible.
A trick here is to catch up: the longer the wait for the
ideal scanner, the longer the process of scanning past work
while trying to keep up with new work. That's what is most
daunting in my experience.
--
John Matturri
words and images:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
