Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarvis
Wow, insane. DigitalFAQ, are you up to the job? Haha  |
Only if they're willing to pay for it.
Too many government agencies look for the lowest price transfer work, and end up with extremely low quality work from the likes of YesVideo. Too many "archivists" are completely unaware of what quality video should look like. They're "paper people" for the most part. They'd scream bloody murder over 1% acid content in paper, but are completely oblivious to serious video flaws like timebase errors or chroma noise -- and the fact that these things can be removed with the right hardware.
This has long been a gripe of mine: People in a position on power, controlling the video quality that others must deal with, are very often unqualified. Whether it's in-house government training videos (VHS transitioned to DVD), or the recent
Inspector Gadget box set that was $100 and had nasty deinterlacing on S3 (broadcast masters to DVD), somebody somewhere didn't know their @ss from their elbow, and the mess was approved (QC) and released.
To date, we've never landed a government contract, because they want $5/tape work. I'm sorry, but that's insane. That's quite literally slave wages. Like being a waiter or waitress, but without the tips!
So for example, if you've ever wonder why the video on archive.org looks lousy -- that's why.
The private sector -- studios, individuals -- understands quality, and is willing to pay a fair rate for it.
* Much of this has to do with government's pathetic budgeting for "unimportant" programs (not!), and gutting those budgets instead of raising taxes on the obscenely wealthy and closing tax loopholes on corporations. But I digress...
