3 ms·

71k tapes, 400k hours. 480p H.264 (already better quality than VHS) can be encoded at around 300MB/h, so the whole collection would take approximately 120TB, or

71k tapes, 400k hours. 480p H.264 (already better quality than VHS) can be encoded at around 300MB/h, so the whole collection would take approximately 120TB, or less than 10 LTO-9 tapes. It's always amazing to see the massive increase in storage density over time, although reliability is a different story; nonetheless, tape is an established good choice for long-term archival.

tonetegeatinst 2y ago
Does the IA have an archive collection where all that data sits? I search IA but multiple collections get shown with varying content and sizes
- no_news_is 2y ago
  This comment has details https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40705086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40705086 Direct link to the videos https://archive.org/details/marionstokesvideo https://archive.org/details/marionstokesvideo
dylan604 2y ago
> (already better quality than VHS) This is misleading statement. If the recording format is better than the source format, it does not mean that the recording of the source will be better than the source. So I'm not really sure why this was added to all of the stats you've mentioned. Why not say that the LTO-9 tapes are better quality than VHS? You then go on to say that "can" be encoded at around 300MB/h, yet that is also very misleading. Nobody encoding VHS tape sources at 480p will be using that kind of bit rate. You have to be using some very strange settings to even be able to convince an encoder to allow that value, and even then the encoder is so efficient I doubt it would ever use that bandwidth.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- exe34 2y ago
  i think the aim was to put an upper bound on the estimate. so in practise it would cost less, much less perhaps.
amelius 2y ago
I just wish the LTO-9 drives came down in price, and into the reach of consumers and small startups.
kouru225 2y ago
A h264 encoded file of a vhs tape is not better than vhs

tonetegeatinst 2y ago

Does the IA have an archive collection where all that data sits? I search IA but multiple collections get shown with varying content and sizes

no_news_is 2y ago
This comment has details https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40705086 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40705086 Direct link to the videos https://archive.org/details/marionstokesvideo https://archive.org/details/marionstokesvideo

dylan604 2y ago

> (already better quality than VHS) This is misleading statement. If the recording format is better than the source format, it does not mean that the recording of the source will be better than the source. So I'm not really sure why this was added to all of the stats you've mentioned. Why not say that the LTO-9 tapes are better quality than VHS? You then go on to say that "can" be encoded at around 300MB/h, yet that is also very misleading. Nobody encoding VHS tape sources at 480p will be using that kind of bit rate. You have to be using some very strange settings to even be able to convince an encoder to allow that value, and even then the encoder is so efficient I doubt it would ever use that bandwidth.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
exe34 2y ago
i think the aim was to put an upper bound on the estimate. so in practise it would cost less, much less perhaps.

amelius 2y ago

I just wish the LTO-9 drives came down in price, and into the reach of consumers and small startups.

kouru225 2y ago

A h264 encoded file of a vhs tape is not better than vhs