On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 03:04:51PM -0400, Robert Cicconetti wrote:
On 5/22/05, Jim Tinsley <jtinsley@pobox.com> wrote:
On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 08:25:24PM +0200, Branko Collin wrote:
But all of that is not as good as getting a more accurate capture of the original. To me, converting those video files is like automated conversion of text to html.. useful to some, but referring back to the original text delivers a much better final product.
For 1994, that is very good digital video footage. For 2005.. well, most camera phones do better.
For 11 years, anybody could have come to us with improvements to it, and they still can. Such is the nature of PG; things get built on, improved, re-formatted, whatever. 16MB was quite a chunk of real-estate to devote to this back in 1994. 16MB is not so scary now! If you, or someone, can get better originals, then you should by all means let us know.
BTW, the mac file is fine, if mislabelled.. it is binhexed. Once you extract the data fork of 0005.QT, it plays just fine. Actually, I'd say it the best of the three, by a fair margin.
Thanks! That's all I needed to know to restore the file to a state playable by the average user today. Binhex . . . I haven't used that in YEARS. If the other two had also had the wrong extensions, I do think I would've got suspicious; as it was, and with the archive.org corruption, I didn't look hard enough. OK, the MOV is now fixed on both servers, and that's an end to the errata requirement. jim