Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/11/28

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Digital storage???
From: Bill Barrett <barrettb@dialup.websteruniv.edu>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 14:16:08

Jim Brick worte,
>Here in Silicon Valley, numerous storage manufacturers (Conners, Segate,
>etc.) are nearly ready to introduce TeraByte disk drives. And within
>another couple of years, terabyte drives will be small enough to fit in
>notebook computers. A terabyte is 1000 gigabytes (10 to the 12th power
>bytes. A trillion bytes). Within five years, storage methods, whether on
>media, silicon, or organic in nature, will surpass anything you can
>presently fathom. As digital technology progresses, receptors become higher
>in resolution and faster, lossless compression and massive storage will
>progress as well. The need for something fuels the fire to develop it.
>Hope all you USA LUGgers had your fill of either Turkey or Tofurkey.

Right you are, of course. A friend who retired from Kodak R&D told me that
for years now they've had the capability of writing digital data accurately
_on the molecular level_! (How many molecules on the surface of a CD
platter?) The problem, he said, is manufacturing a drive that can _read_ it
back accurately, and pricing such a drive at anywhere near an affordable
level. Makes sense to me.

So what's the next word after terabyte (1000 terabytes)? My vote is for
gazigabyte, but I'm  sure someone already has something more technical and
rational -- and boring -- ready to go. Anyone? (I've been asking my
computer science colleagues for a while, and no one has had an answer yet.)

And Kari wrote in a later message,
>I don't know much about digital imaging but I've seen the following  
>estimate a few times: a 35mm frame of Velvia has about 64 megabytes  
>of useful information. "Useful" I think referring to how close  
>shades human eye can distinguish.

I find this a fascinating question as well. The "old" Kodak Premier Imaging
Station scanned 35mm in at 70MB, but the new Kodak RFS scanners I'm now
using (both 3570 and 2035) max out at 18MB. Can someone tell us what size
file the Leica S1 station scans in at? Kari may well be right about 64MB,
but I have to say that the dye sub prints I made of (Leica M6) 35mm
Ektachrome, at about 16MB each, look fine in the show they're in right now,
and are next to conventional C prints. And so far, no one seems to have
noticed any difference.

And thanksgiving dinner was wonderful, sans turkey or tofu, but with an
array of delightful dishes and loved ones around the table. Hope yours was
and is too, whether or not you celebrate this US holiday.

cheers
Bill

Bill Barrett
St. Louis
barrettb@webster.edu (preferred address for personal mail)
http://www.webster.edu/~barrettb