Good morning,

Just a quick observation about scanned images.  The density of the scanning
one does now should be dependent on the density of the images being scanned,
and also the use to which one will put them.  An example of this is from my
personal experience with aerial photographs.  The most general use to which
my county puts them is for oversight of roads and geographic features such
as culverts by our Public Works department.  Surveyors also typically access
these.

When scanned at our usual 300 ppi (standard for us owing to state
regulations) they proved unusable when zoomed for more detail.  It just
wasn't there.  The images were far too blurry to be useful.  We needed to go
up to 600 ppi or better to retain the usefulness.  

Just a thought about retaining the functionality of the records after
scanning.

A.S.Elizabeth Fairfax, MA, CA
Island County Records and Information Management Program
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
x5569


-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Wayne Hoff
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 7:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Large file size of scanned images

It is well worth it to go as low as possible on resolution.  Larry uses 150
DPI - 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]