Print

Print


From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

Hello,

Richard Hess wrote:

> At 04:50 AM 2009-06-12, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:
> >----- you seem to presume (as did Mike Biel) that from one reel we get
> two
> >reels. In a world where we could store each item according to its
> individual
> >climatic requirements, this would be natural. However, why not keep it on
> one
> >reel, only shuffled according to Eric's rule (1). This would only mean to
> >stick end-to end that which has already been necessary work for the
> transfer
> >process.
> >
> >The question then becomes a combination of "tails out?" and "acetate or
> >polyester out?". I would propose SS-prone out, because that provides the
> >largest radius of curvature of that part of the pack.
> 
> I would strongly suggest that it be SSS-prone in because the goal 
> here is to remove the acetate tape prior to re-baking.

----- point taken as regards batch processing on the reel. I was thinking of 
the peeling situation and the use of a Copeland-style "grandfather clock" 
approach to baking. Baking in a tunnel oven, so to speak. In that case, 
having the affected part outermost and at a large radius of curvature might 
make sense. 

> 
> As to the ethics of what is being done, I was assuming that despite 
> leader and taking splices apart that Eric is assembling a tight A-B 
> roll and having similar if not-identical crossfades in the final, 
> delivered file. The concept here -- and it certainly needs to be 
> noted -- that the digital surrogate matches the original in the 
> condition originally found to the best of our ability and that the 
> original was disassembled in order to obtain the best possible 
> digital copy and to facilitate re-play with the needed processing.

----- is there a verb missing here, and in that case, what is it, and where 
is it to go? It would have an influence on the statement. And we still have 
to imagine scenarios for when anybody would want to access the "original" 
again.

Kind regards,


George