3 ms·
The article gives absolutely no impression of the tech used to digitize it. It's made clear in the article that they did actually open it for the digitization (
by GauntletWizard 11y ago
The article gives absolutely no impression of the tech used to digitize it. It's made clear in the article that they did actually open it for the digitization (I was imagining a fanciful rig carefully sliding between pages to scan them), but it's basically a puff piece for the actual gallery, which is only linked at the end. Here's what you really want to see:
http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098/1 http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098/1
My parents have some similar calligraphy watercolors; Korean in origin, though using chinese characters. They're quite a sight to behold (though not nearly as old), with fantastic use of minimalism and color to portray the life and depth of trees and birds.
- userbinator 11y agoI think they just opened it and took a picture of each page. According to the EXIF data in the images it was taken with a Phase One IQ180 - a very high-end 80MP digital camera that costs $40k+: http://www.wired.com/2011/05/phase-one-iq180/ http://www.wired.com/2011/05/phase-one-iq180/ What I find annoying is that the viewer is yet another one of those JS-heavy web apps... when this could be done much simpler using a static page image gallery, or even better, a PDF. (Contrast it with the digital library at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10006579 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10006579 to see what i mean.) The direct links to the high-res images (not the full 80MP, but ~3.5MP) are here: http://193.60.88.193/content/images/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098-000-00001.jpg http://193.60.88.193/content/images/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098-... through http://193.60.88.193/content/images/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098-000-00388.jpg http://193.60.88.193/content/images/PR-FH-00910-00083-00098-...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]