A couple of comments:

1. If the resolution at which your images are regulary scanned is low (e.g.
72 dpi) and bit depth shallow, degradation of few pixels will have a more
significant effect. You can look at our imaging standards at
http://siarchives.si.edu/records/records_erecords_digitization_images.html.
The U.S. GPO has a good reference posted on their website aggregating input
from nationally recognized digital preservation experts involved in
establishing just these types of requirements for the GPO's project to
digitize all of their paper records held at every federal repository, see
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/about/reports/preservation.html.

2. Quality control of your imaging process is a must, both of the image
upon scan and image as recorded on the storage media. You never know when
you'll run across a bad disk (hard, magnetic, or optical) or tape. Likely to
be a significant annoyance if you have _assumed_ that your burn to the
storage media was successful without actually checking it.

Riccardo Ferrante, Information Technology Archivist
Smithsonian Institution Archives
900 Jefferson Dr. SW, Room 2135 A&I, MRC 414
Washington, DC 20013

T  202-357-1421 x45
F  202-357-2395
E  [log in to unmask]

>>> [log in to unmask] 3/3/2005 >>>
Good Morning all from the sunny Rockies,

We are in a debate with our users and scan operators over image quality.
We have some users who feel even a pixel out of place is grounds to rescan a
document and others feel that they do not even need to review a document
once it's gone to the scanner.  They want to assume that the scan operator
has checked it.  Which is not happening.  We are in the process of
developing our own standards and it occurs to me that others may have been
on this slippery slope before.

Thanks for all assistance.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance