In article ,
Laurence Payne lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:
When ITV was a 'proper' organisation, their labs at Teddington Studios
were developing a system for storing digitally TV colour pics and stereo
sound on 16mm B&W film - which is a cheap material for archiving, with a
projected life if properly stored of over 100 years. ISTR it was capable
in theory of handling HDTV too.

Cheap in its day perhaps. Particularly if you had a film processing
plant on the premises :-)

Film is still used although not in the same quantities and I'd guess will
be for the foreseeable future. Bit like LP, actually.
And 16mm B&W stock is still quite cheap.

--
*I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)"


The cost of the stock is only one thing. The cost of constantly
transferring material as the storage medium fails quite another .....


** ROTFLMAO !

What a totally, ASININE, hypothetical, ****WIT excuse for storing it data
on a CRAP medium that cost over 10,000 times more than DVD.

Bet this cretinous ** Plowman ** IMBECILE keeps all his smelly turds in
the family fridge !!!!

In case someone wants to peruse them in 100 years time !



What an arrogant, know nothing, POMMY MORON !!


I'm delighted to be thought as such by you.


** Hordes of ASD ****ed, pommy ****heads, just like you, need to be put
out of your collective miseries ASAP.

Mind you, NOT out of any concern for their putrid little lives, but out
of sympathy for all the innocent others whose pointless lives THEY make so
much worse than they have any need to be.


Drop stone dead - you ****ing **** head.




.......... Phil

Laurence Payne wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

You obviously have no idea of the possible value of an archived TV
program. It might sell for thousands of times the value of the stock.

Or for tens of thousands times the price of cheaper stock. I know
you're arguing with an idiot, but keep it real:-)

The issue of archival material lifetime is a real one.

Film stock is a proven performer in this regard.

Graham

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 12:55:52 +0000, Eeyore
wrote:


Or for tens of thousands times the price of cheaper stock. I know
you're arguing with an idiot, but keep it real:-)

The issue of archival material lifetime is a real one.

Film stock is a proven performer in this regard.

There are also plenty of stories of film, stored under less than
optimal conditions, completely falling to pieces.

In article ,
Laurence Payne lpayne1NOSPAM@dslDOTpipexDOTcom wrote:
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 12:55:52 +0000, Eeyore
wrote:


Or for tens of thousands times the price of cheaper stock. I know
you're arguing with an idiot, but keep it real:-)

The issue of archival material lifetime is a real one.

Film stock is a proven performer in this regard.

There are also plenty of stories of film, stored under less than
optimal conditions, completely falling to pieces.

Usually older nitrate stock. But one would assume if you intend archiving
something you'd keep it in ideal conditions. Applies to any medium, though.

--
*There are two kinds of pedestrians... the quick and the dead.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 00:15:28 +1100, Phil Allison wrote:

snip

** 10, 000s times more expensive than CDs or DVDs - you asinine pommy
twit.

What does 4 hours of film cost - you IDIOT !!


Hiya Phil! Will no-one talk to you on rat now then? ;-)

Cost isn't an issue if you are producing the video data on it anyway. Not
everywhere uses DVD for video even now, so film is still used. You are
getting the digital audio distribution for free (providing that the
projection system can read it of course).

As for film archiving, this link may be of some interest.
http://www.nrfta.org.uk/preservation.html

--
Mick (Working in a M$-free zone!)
Remove blockage to use my email address
Web: http://www.nascom.info & http://mixpix.batcave.net

Laurence Payne wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

Or for tens of thousands times the price of cheaper stock. I know
you're arguing with an idiot, but keep it real:-)

The issue of archival material lifetime is a real one.

Film stock is a proven performer in this regard.

There are also plenty of stories of film, stored under less than
optimal conditions, completely falling to pieces.

Acetate base I expect.

The modern stuff uses polyester.

Graham