Print

Print


I did a brief exchange with archivists at the US National Archives for
complimentary reasons, here's the response:


>-inch tape reel-to-reel audio tape
>(Absolutley no cassette)
>Digital WAV files eventually.
>
>Re. video tape, see:
>
><http://aic.stanford.edu/treasure/video.html>http://aic.stanford.edu/treasure/video.html
>
>Mitsui gold or Kodak gold CD-R discs for CD audio and CDROM data.
>
>archival quality paper per
>
><http://www.access.gpo.gov/qualitycontrol/paperspecs/>http://www.access.gpo.gov/qualitycontrol/paperspecs/
>
>No ink jet.  (except Epson has recently introduced pigmented ink that will
>likely qualify.
>
>See:
>
><http://www.wilhelm-research.com/>http://www.wilhelm-research.com/
>
>Most laser jet OK
>
>See:
>
><http://www.nara.gov/arch/techinfo/reformat/tip5.html>http://www.nara.gov/arch/techinfo/reformat/tip5.html
>



At 12:00 AM 12/31/2001 -0500, Automatic digest processor wrote:
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date:    Sun, 30 Dec 2001 21:17:06 +1100
>From:    Poe Lim <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Digital Photo Printing
>
>Looks like I'm in a very similar situation, although I'm lucky in that I
>have VisionGraphics, a pro lab, very close to hand, and they do offer
>digital printing at reasonable prices (to photographic paper, similar to
>what they do for enlargements, which are digitally done nowadays). From what
>I've seen of the Canon S800, the output is very good, and for most photos
>will be more than good enough (very smooth skin tones to the naked eye).
>Used with their paper, they claim 25 years, which isn't a problem as after
>25 years, just print a new copy. So I may still go inkjet, with pro lab for
>larger prints
>
>Cheers,
>Poe Lim
>[log in to unmask]


Warm regards,


Marv