Funston: b0467 ops to rrw 06/27/11

Bug #802755 reported by microfilm processing
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
ia-tracking
New
Undecided
Jude Coelho

Bug Description

Scanning Center: Funston

Description of Failure: archive.php - failed to delete

http://www.archive.org/catalog.php?history=1&identifier=researchfoundati65rese

Item uploaded but failed to delete from computer. We have manually deleted the folder.

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: nobody → Hank Bromley (hank-archive)
Revision history for this message
Hank Bromley (hank-archive) wrote :

Redrow cleared, item now moving through book-ops (no derive).

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: Hank Bromley (hank-archive) → microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops)
status: New → Fix Committed
Revision history for this message
microfilm processing (microfilm-processing) wrote :
Changed in ia-tracking:
status: Fix Committed → New
assignee: microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops) → Hank Bromley (hank-archive)
Revision history for this message
Hank Bromley (hank-archive) wrote :

Those are both derive.php redrows, not archive.php ones.

The items failed because they each contain 19,000+ images. Some of our code breaks when image stacks are larger than 10,000.

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: Hank Bromley (hank-archive) → microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops)
status: New → In Progress
Revision history for this message
microfilm processing (microfilm-processing) wrote :

The 2 items have been re-scanned and framed properly to decrease image counts to less than 9,999. Would like to gutt these items so the revised ones are uploaded, but should we proceed gutting or let the redrows clear?

Thanks!

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops) → Hank Bromley (hank-archive)
Revision history for this message
Hank Bromley (hank-archive) wrote :

The redrowed derives wouldn't prevent you from gutting the items, but if you'll be starting a fresh set of tasks, anyway, there's no reason to keep the red derives around; I've cleared them.

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: Hank Bromley (hank-archive) → microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops)
Revision history for this message
microfilm processing (microfilm-processing) wrote :
Changed in ia-tracking:
status: In Progress → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
microfilm processing (microfilm-processing) wrote :

Scancenter: Funston

Description of problem: Poor Quality - Images are sideways

http://www.archive.org/details/researchfoundati41rese
http://www.archive.org/details/researchfoundati55rese

All images need to be rotated counter-clockwise. Unfortunately we don't have the reels in-house. Is there a way we can rotate without asking for the reels to be sent back and rescanned? Paul had mention that he could show us but didn't have time to.

Thanks!

Changed in ia-tracking:
assignee: microfilm-ops (microfilm-ops) → Jude Coelho (judec)
status: Fix Released → New
Revision history for this message
Hank Bromley (hank-archive) wrote :

I'm not sure what Paul had in mind. The only route that occurs to me is for someone to arrange renaming of the all the files in the jp2.zip so they can become an orig_jp2.tar instead, and then modify the scandata to specify that each image should be rotated. Then the deriver would do the rotation while making a new set of processed jp2s from what will have become orig jp2s.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.