Garth Wood wrote:
>
> Well, looking over the posts which brim over with enthusiasm
> for the idea of an electronically-distributed (assumedly, via
> the 'Net) Olympus Calendar,
Not many, but more posts than when you proposed the price tag
of a conventionally printed calendar.
> I got to thinking: just how big
> would this sucker be, in file size(s)? Here's some quick
> back-of-the-envelope calculations:
>
> If the assembled personages of this august list wanted to have
> 2450 dpi output (Lino, gives approx. 133 lpi [good magazine
> quality]), the following would hold.
>
> Image Size: 8" x 10" (for example)
> Bits per square inch: 2450 x 2450 = 6,002,500
> Square inches in image: 80
> Size of image file (ignoring overhead, monochrome):
> 80 x 6,002,500 = 480,200,000 bits
> = 60,025,000 bytes
> = 57.24 Mbytes
> Size of image file (CMYK): 4 x 57.24 Mbytes = 228.98 Mbytes
>
> Download speed using a 28.8 modem dialup with 97 0.000000e+00fficiency
> (27,936 bps):
> (480,200,000 x 4) / 27,936 = 68,757 seconds
> = 19.1 hours (approx.)
>
> That's for *one* image, folks. If you drop the dpi (you no
> longer have display-quality on paper, although a good dye-sub
> printer could fake a lot because it does continuous-tone
> gradations), you get the following results:
>
> At 600 dpi output, file size is 13.73 Mbytes for CMYK
> separation, 68.73 mins. d/l time at 28.8 Kbps w/97 0.000000e+00fficiency
> At 300 dpi, file size is 3.43 Mbytes for CMYK, 17.18 mins d/l
> time as above
>
> Now assume you have *twelve* of these images (singles or
> composites of several images, doesn't matter), plus another few
> megs for the line art on a calendar.
>
> Anybody on this list really that interested in getting digital
> delivery of a calendar? It could be "Web-ified" (a series of
> Web pages, one or more for each month), and people could simply
> surf to the appropriate month, but quality would suffer (you can
> do a lot with "lossy" compression, but there are limits).
>
> Nevertheless, I think this is a good idea, *provided* everyone
> here understands the quality compromises inherent in digitizing
> their photos and delivering them via relatively thin pipes.
> Alternatively, delivery could be on CD (not for the 2450 dpi
> option, but for the others), but I'm not sure I'd want to mount
> the authoring effort (not to mention the cost) involved in
> burning X number of CDs and sending them all over the planet
> via Canada Post.
>
> Thoughts?
I think folks on the prairies have too much time on their hands.
;^)
Lets get a little real here. Scale down the physical size (1
month per standard size page (includes grid and picture) or less.
Look seriously at acceptable levels of resolution and compression.
Since I haven't seen anyone ready to step up to the plate with
$8K to $10K CDN front money for conventional printing, digital is
probably the only way this is going to happen.
Now we just have to keep our prospective contractor from bidding
himself out of a job.
Larry
-------------------------------------------------------
An example of too much time, and too much technology...
http://www.twodimes.org/home
-------------------------------------------------------
##################################################################
# This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List
# To receive the Olympus Digest send mail to: listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
# with subscribe olympus-digest in the message body.
#
# To unsubscribe from the current list send a message to
# listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx with unsubscribe olympus in the message body.
#
# For questions email: owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
##################################################################
|