[78-L] ^what archival really means
burnhamd at rogers.com.invalid
Mon Feb 9 21:38:55 PST 2015
I don't know if you're still talking about "archival" or "Broadcast quality", but the latter term needed specific measurements; DVDs were "better than broadcast quality", not every disc by a long shot, but the format itself at its best was capable of higher resolution than broadcast TV.
Regular audio CDs are easily capable of frequency response, distortion measurements and noise levels far in excess of even the finest FM transmissions. Broadcast transmissions, audio or video, have to adhere to strict limitations of bandwidth where as recorded media can go far beyond these limitations. So once again, "broadcast quality" is very specific and not a particularly high quality to strive for.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 9, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Joe Salerno <jsalerno at collector.org.invalid> wrote:
> Maybe at one time it did, but when everybody started throwing the term
> around to describe whatever they have to offer, no matter how bad, it
> became meaningless.
> Joe Salerno
>> On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Dave Burnham wrote:
>> Broadcast quality means that it meets the specs of regular television, (as opposed to HDTV).
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> On Feb 9, 2015, at 11:50 AM, Joe Salerno <jsalerno at collector.org.invalid> wrote:
>>> It's all hype anyway. In the video production business, there is a term
>>> "broadcast quality" which also means nothing, never defined clearly, but
>>> handy to toss around to sell something to an unsuspecting buyer -
>>> especially in this day when TV stations will use any footage from any
>>> source to report news or fill the video space.
>>> Joe Salerno
>>>> On 2/8/2015 4:38 PM, David Lennick wrote:
>>>> Lordy but I hate those crappy photo albums. Now, let's take on "organic".
>>> 78-L mailing list
>>> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
>> 78-L mailing list
>> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
More information about the 78-L