Following Up and Feedback
First an apology. In C&I 6:6, I took Siva Vaidhyanathan to task for apparently concluding that he knows more about librarianship than the directors of Michigan, Stanford, Oxford, and Harvard libraries and NYPL. I included an analogy based on my belief that Gale Norton also seems to believe she knows more about the environment than environmentalists and environmental scientists. The analogy was badly worded and made an inappropriate comparison.
I apologize for that analogy. Siva Vaidhyanathan clearly does favor libraries, even if he disagrees with many librarians and views the Google Library Project in harshly negative terms.
I do not apologize for criticizing Vaidhyanathan’s extreme negativism regarding Google Library Project, his assertion that the case law on fair use “is totally hostile to Google,” and his claims that the Google 5 libraries “have abrogated their responsibility to defend the very values that librarianship supports.”
A multipart conversation—partly blogs and comments, partly email—took place regarding this whole situation. (The conversation also involved Seth Finkelstein and “Not Liz.”) I saved most of the conversation in the thought that a followup might be worthwhile, and got Prof. Vaidhyanathan’s permission to quote any or all of his email. On reflection, I don’t believe that followup would serve a purpose. The public portion of the discussion is out there. The private followup was cordial. I recognize that Vaidhyanathan takes forceful stances; in most cases, those forceful stances are beneficial.
An item in February’s Trends & Quick Takes (C&I 6:3, p. 18) noted Gary Merson’s tests, reported in The Perfect Vision, finding that most HDTV sets currently on the market were displaying 1080i (the most common form of broadcast HDTV, 1080 lines transmitted as two 540-line fields of “odd” or “even” lines, 60 times a second, to be interlaced into a 30-frame-per-second picture) not by “weaving” the two fields into a single image but by “bobbing,” upconverting each 540-line field into a picture.
Merson’s testing is reported in more detail in the March 2006 Home Theater, including a full list of models tested and how they scored and an illustrated discussion of the problem. This time around, just over half of the TVs (28 of 54) processed and deinterlace 1080i properly, but more than 48% did not.
Of makes with multiple TVs tested, JVC and Toshiba’s all passed, LG and RCA all failed. “Generally speaking, manufacturers who do not advertise that their displays properly interface 1080 may not.” (Hitachi and Pioneer also advertise that their displays do so—and the single model from each make did pass.) Otherwise, figure that more recent and higher-end displays are more likely to pass, e.g., all of Sony’s tested XBR displays passed. The surprising ones are two Mitsubishis and one Sharp with 1080 native resolution that didn’t pass the test.
Cites & Insights is sponsored by YBP Library Services, http://www.ybp.com.
Hosting provided by Boise State University Libraries.
Opinions herein may not represent those of RLG, YBP Library Services, or Boise State University Libraries.
Comments should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org. Comments specifically intended for publication should go to email@example.com. Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large is copyright © 2006 by Walt Crawford: Some rights reserved.
All original material in this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/1.0 or send a letter to Creative Commons, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford, California 94305, USA.