On 21/11/2007, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"There are indeed, some amazing images. I
definitely believe that
publishers could use this resource if they're in need of (one more
image) to complete an existing project. But I'm uncertain about how
publishable much of the content is, especially in the absence of
higher resolution files (which disqualifies printing). "
So although our works are usually sufficient for web use, it seems
clear that we cannot present ourselves as a serious kind of archivist,
culture-recording project, without introducing a RAW format and
encouraging people to use it.
Careful not to jump two steps there :-)
We mainly don't have higher resolution image files because people
aren't uploading high-resolution image files to start with, not
because the high-resolution JPGs or TIFFs which we have Just Aren't
Good Enough(TM).
(Do we allow TIFFs?)
Allowing the upload of RAW files would certainly be a good thing (if
we have the capacity, which I assume we do), but it'll probably mean
that our high-end stuff gets better, not that we make substantially
more content publishable.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk