--- Martyn Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In practice I find that the vast majority of
> players are very happy with a plain black and white
> print produced by less high quality reproduction
> techniques such as those available from SPES (at a
> fraction of BP prices).
>
It seems there has been some mis-communication about
this thread based on different assumptions. Steve and
Gordon are assuming that we're talking about actual
access to the original item itself which, as Gordon
mentioned in another post, can in fact be absolutely
needed. Certain types of scholarly projects of
course need this kind of examination of unique
attributes.
Rather than these types of scholarship, the issue
that I believe Alfonso intitially brought up was the
in-accesability to just the _information_ contained in
these sources. If I remember correctly, he complained
about being charged a high price just for rental of a
microfilm. He probably didn't care too much about
fly-specks or watermarks; he just wanted to play the
music. This hardly requires the high-quality/cost
reproduction process that is used for more serious
endeavours.
This kind of policy effectively _does_ cut off
your average Joe Blow amateur-, semi-serious-, or even
serious-level performer from getting to the stuff.
Would the library folks really rather have it that
needless numbers folks physically travel to the
building and get their grubby hands of the fragile
original? It would seem that making low-quality
reproductions would cut down on preservation and
repair costs in the long run.
Chris
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
To get on or off this list see list information at
http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
