I think fax scans are lower about 150 dpi, but still, usually, readable.
That's a factor of four smaller file size, but even at 300, your figures
yield about 25,000 charts per terabyte. That's four 250 gig hard drives
at about $50 each (on sale).
Mike
Kevin Toppenberg wrote:
As I get close to completing a document imaging system that uses
standard VistA Imaging code, I have wondered what use of the system
will do to my disk space.
Does anyone know what typical scanning resolution is (300 dpi?), and
how much disk space this would take in BW, compressed as JPG file? I
am guessing about 150k per image (image size 8.5x11 inches). If I did
my math right, that would be about 6,600 images per gigabyte. Many of
my charts have about 200 pages in them, so this would be about 25
complete charts per gigabyte.
I am asking this because I am not planning on implementing the
background processor that archives images off of the magnetic disks
into an optical jutebox. It seems that disk drives are growing in
size fast these days.
Any thoughts?
Thanks
Kevin
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
