Minutes of the SIPB Meeting of 03/31/2003 The meeting was called to order at 19:32 by . In attendance were Voting members: rax nim ike golem ssen foley jtu kchen kenta Associate members: jhawk rjbarbal hartmans | sgw int18 gschmidt deberg Prospectives: kilroi cyruse | miah Guests: Treasurer's Report: foley: Because everyone was worried about the cost of my allocations I requested a report of how much we spent last and this year. Tibbetts did not respond. golem: He drunkenly zephyred me. There was not much more information. We have about $9000 left post recurring fees. nim: At the end of the year we pay $5000 in Athena fees. I don't know if he takes that into account. glem: He seemed to be talking about just office money. We were discussing other things to do with it. jhawk: We can expect he took it into account. golem: I believe it was what we were considering buying things with. It seemed about right. It's not very specific information. He said he was too drunk to open up the SAP GUI. nim: I would have thought "not drunk enough." Chairman's Report: golem: I had this crazy idea a few minutes ago that our reports are extremely outdated; no one ever uses sipb-backup report. We should have a report to discuss lameness on allopcations. foley: Where is our damn gong? golem: That is aletta's fault. Office Report: foley: This is going to result in much discussion. So, film scanners. THere was much wanking. After my further research, I discovered there are no general-purpose film scanners on campus other than the NMC flatbed. All the ohters were restricted to members of the group, sometimes even restricted within the group. The Tech will not let anyone touch theirs. The Edgerton center said ha ha you lose. You need to be taking a class. I contacted A/V group and they said "ha ha you lose in general, join one of the student groups." They said Wow, no one has ever asked. SO basically there were none of the capability I wanted publicly on campus and so therefore I want to make an allocation. golem: Could you explain which option you wish to make? foley: The $3000 one. Nothing does good 35mm digitally on campus. We needa high-resoltuion film scanner. No cheaper ones have the capability to do the other formats. I believe SIPB should be able to handle the formats. Out of what I proposed, the first option had a medium-format hi-res 35mm scanner, a sheetfed scanner and software and the second option had a low-res 35mm and a sheetbed scanner and a flatbed film scanner and the software. The second option comes out to $1330 or $1230. I propose we spend $3100 to purchase a Minolta DMage multiPro, an Epson Perfection and viewscan software. golem: SO the medium-format is a film scanner? foley: Dedicated. I wanted that because it is much harder to break a dedicated film scanner because you cannot get at the optics. It makes it harder to coke. jhawk: You can still salami it. gschmidt: Can you summarize the capabilities? foley: The first option lets us do every format there is 3xcept APS at very high resolution. It lets us use sheetfed, though the second can also. The second gives you up to 4"x9" at a decently high resolution but worse fragility and maintenance. It is much lower resolution but lets us do APS. gschmidt: So it is reolution and fragility? foley: And perfomance. The more expensive one fixes noise and scratches. ike: SO medium format is some other size of film? foley: Yes. Actually, the medium format film scanner will do 6 panels of 35mm. nim: Do either or both give us the ability to scan a stack of 8.5x11 paper? foley: Yes, both. This is the cheapest one I could find. I am still looking at information from Jeremy Brown. This will do at least someting. kenta: For option A we are screwed if we have APS. foley: Yes, unless we want to buy an APS-capable which adds more money. ssen: What is APS? foley: It is a special format Kodak developed to make money. It is a cartridge and it is small. deberg: We can add APS for $200? foley: More like $300. We would basically be putting them both together. ike: Why can;t you do this piecewise since the sheetfed is separate? golem: Ike, there is a reason they are connected. It's a rider. This is an omnibus bill. foley: I did this to make people happy. jtu: How would users be able to get their pictures? foley: My respons on email was that generally you have one or two pictures in mind, not an entire roll. It's generally used for cropping or high-res prints. You don't need 4000dpi for a picture on your webpage. golem: If people actually find that they are troubled by the lack of ability to move data off, that is a service we could provide. hartmans: I would like ot see the questions divided. golem: Can it wait until discussion? hartmans: I am happy waiting. golem: How about we wait until we finish discussing this. gschmidt: If we wanted APS later, could we just spend $300? foley: The only disturbing thing is that you can't add an APS widget. the $300 is to buy a low-res scanner and get an APS widget. gschmidt: So for $600 more we could get a hi-res scanner with an APS widget? foley: Yes. deberg: From a service standpoint there seem to be three formats: mediumformat 35mm and APS. With apologiers, I imagine there are many people who want APS and 35mm foley: I ahve only seen a few APS. I know a lot of people with mediumformat. deberg: Really? Wow. It seems to be naively that a $300 scanner - foley: That gives us 3000dpi. deberg: So that seems like a really big bang for the buck unless we think it is actually going to suck. $3000 for a scanner that only does $35 and medium seems like a lot of money for a smaller userbase. foley: They are both frm the same manufacturer. They both have good reviews. deberg: Is there a reason besides mediumformat and the dpi? foley: Faster, fatser interfaces, sheet microfilm, 15 different formats the other can't including scientific. deberg: It sounds like if we get the expensive one we should by the $600+ one. foley: You don't need the extra 1000 dpi for that one. golem: Discussion seems to have died- jtu: What do groups around campus that use mediumformat do? foley: They have their own. No one uses flatbed - the tech has a very expensive very ncie one that does 10000 dpi. The other group has a midrange mediumformat scanner. Other groups send it out to a service somewhere else. golem: Any procedural lawyers can interrupt me. hartmans: Is there a specific motion? foley: I motioned $3100 for the first option. hartmans: The second option is? foley: hartmans: I move to amend joe's current proposal to be the parts in common between option one and two. That is I want to vote on the sheet scanner. foley: My motion is currently for option A. golem: I think we all understand. <9-3-2, motion passes> [foley allocation: $3100 for film scanners] golem: SOmething funny happens. nim: Vote on the sheetfed scanner. golem: It's $450 for an Epson Perfection 1640. foley: So the original allocation is now $2600 for the Minolta. nim: To reiterate, without the sheetfed scanner the difference is a little bit of reolution and 35 and mediumformat vs 35 and APS. foley: There is difference also to photographers. If you add the other options together you get $800. him: How much for 35 and APS? foley: $500ish. gschmidt: Other groups send away. how high to we need before coming to SIPb is a viable option? Will both options serve their purposes? foley: Option one serves it best. The second does not let you scan by the edges, and the color is slightly off. hartmans: The flatbed is for mediumformat? foley: It will also do 35. But you only need it for medium. You can also do transparencies. gschmidt: Do we have to choose option one to be useful for other student groups? foley: No. They are both good. For 35 they are both good, for APS only the second is good. Option one is the only one that wil,l do mediumformat good enough. gschmidt: Student groups that send away use what format? foley: Mediumformat. kenta: It seems that if you want to do proofs, you don't need a very good mediumformat scanner. foley: But that's not as much of a service. Most sendaway places do not use film scanners either. jtu: How many student groups use this and how often? foley: Three. Two have their own scanners. The thing is there are a lot of people not involved with these groups. hartmans: I believe you have not presented a sufficient justification for medium format. I do not know if it is a big userbase or one that works well with FTGOS. Is it significantly improving the computing at MIT to support this film? jhawk: Prior to a couple of weeks ago I did not think there was much market. A lot of mail thinks there is market for APS and some indicated mediumformat. I think it is important not only to look at this from FTGOS but forom cool toys. It is ok to spend money on cool toys. We shouldn't let that stop us. On the other hand I have mixed emotions about the userbase. As someone in the office a loit, I can't say the idea of hordes coming in to use our film scanner excites me. THere is a high potential for support problems and we need to be aware of that. I prefer we had a cool toy that the world would not come running to our door about. I will also point out that I have scanned microfiche from the libraries and that was handy. SO I think on the balance the justification for the expensive option is a little bit weak but SIPB has spent more money on weaker justified things in the past and it would be nice to have a cool toy. nim: I thnk the APS userbase will be alrger than mediumformat. We get more bang for less buck on the second option. golem: I was going to only say one little thing but now I have a huge rant. First jhawk's attitude is utterly unacceptable except for the cool toys. His unwillingness to deal with the users is extremely disappointing to me. I do not want this meme of you lmaking users feel unwelcome using the scanner to spread. jhawk: I object. golem: I think it is not ok for you to say what you did, thus giving other SIPB people the idea that t is ok. It would be great if everyone wanted to uise whatever service we provided. I have a lot of experience with users not wanting to come into the SIPB office to use our scanner because we are too scary. They ask me to scan things becasue they will not come here. The second part of my rant is that Yes, in fact we should get cool toys and it really isn't that much and most importantly something Joe has been too polite to point out is that Joe has been going to a lot of trouble to do this and I think it was rude to separate his rider. I think the limiting factor in most SIpb services is effort people will go into to make this happen. I think that if Joe is willing to go to the effort he should have the perogative. I think that if he is willing to do this, he should be able to do the medium-format. I believe geting an advanced sertvcie enables people to do mroe that they might not have been doing befgore at all. That is all. hartmans: So SIPB is a computer gruop, it is not a photography group. We do not want it to become a photography group. SIPB should not be where you go do all your film scanning. It seems reasonable for SIPB to provide a casual film-scanning service. It seems rteasonable to provide a casual service so people can occasionally develop film here. I think it is reasonable to say that if you are really into film and doing your own film scanning than maybe you should get your own film scanner or start a computer phogorapjhy group or something. SIPB should not be the technical solutions to everyone else's problems group. That is a drain on our rersources. We are not a generalprupose cluster.I do not want to get to a point where there are a lot fo people who think sipb is an important part of their photography. A lot fo people using our machines and space and not FTGOSing is bad. On the other hand if we do this we should definitely support. sgw: Almost everything Sam jsut said is wrong. SIPB is a student computer advocacy group. Bringinfg these services in is why we exist. If it grows big we can rally for it to be more available throughout MIT. THis is part of SIPB's purpose. WHat I would like to know is does the scanner have a consumable cost? What about maintenance and lifetime? SIPB is a pretty harsh environment. foley: A flatbed has to be kept clean and scratch-free. A film scanner has no glass except the lens inside. THere is an airknife that cleans the area. You occasionally need to pop it open to check for dust, but that is intentionally hard. jtu: How do you intned to advertise this service? How do you do it for people who do not know Joe FOley? foley: There were these student groups I conteacted before, including MIT A/V. The previous response was "there is nothing." Now they can be pointed at us. The NMC wanted this but had no budget. gschmidt: Certainly in the past SIPB has had scanners and CDR and stuff. There is a list of instructions and you can help them do X. I think the complexity of this is important. How long does it take? foley: It takes about 15 seconds without thinking hard. ON a linux box. That's why we are spending $80 on the software gschmidt: How long do these last? and how long until we look at it and laught because this one is old? foley: It is not moving that fast. This has been the highest resolution in stnadard for three years. I think it will last for four years at least. No matter how good your scanner gets, you are still limited by the printer. gschmidt: Is there substantial difference in the second option? foley: Yes, it is a flatbed scanner for meidumformat and the 35mm has less good color representation, though you will only notice as a phoographer. gschmit: I think we should spend the $600 for APS if we go option one. foley: I have not researched that one. foley: Now that we are back to me, I agree with sgw. What I hear from Sam and JOhn is that we don't want people coming to SIPB. hartmans: NO! foley: We don't want tons of people coming to the SIPB, draining our resources, and thengoing away, is what you said. hartmans: Yes. hartmsn: I can't respond usefully. Put me in the queue. foley: WIthin mind making the APS users happy, I want to include the relevant scanner, adding the APS otion for $300 making the allocation $2900. This includes all formats at a reasonable resolution. jhawk: Is that the same as youw ere advocating Goeff? gschmidt: No, I think we should buy the nicer piece of equipment. jhawk: I want to counter what foley and chris said about my comment. I do not believ SIPB should push users away. We should recognize it can be a burden to those in the office when people come in and require a lot of help. THe current scanner has not bbeen problem-free. I have not been discouraging users and help them but it has a tendency to be exasperating. I sdo not think we are pushing into that space but advertising might do that. I think Steve also has a good point and we could always give up and give it to the NMC. I have nothing more to say. Wait! The printing issue. I don't know if it is an issue or not, but people won't have anywhere to print. foley: You can print at copytech at 1440+. The whole point of doing hires is to print as big as you want. golem: It is the same as the network issue. If it becomes a problem we know we are doing something right. rax: I'd like to make the suggestion that this discussion is not going anywhere useful. golem: I thnk a few people had not made up their minds, though I do not know if this is helping. deberg: INcredibly I agree with jhawk and steve and goeff. I think we hjave bought a sheetbed scanner and were about to buy two more scanners. I want to increase it to $3200 so that if the more expensive APS one would work, we would get that instead instead of two- foley: We still get two. deberg: I though the highend one did not do APS, but if we bought a mroe expesnive one? foley: No. deberg: What is the $600? foley: A better version of the $300 one that does entire rolls. deberg: Without manual intervention? hartmans: DOn't all these do this? foley: No, they do 6-8 in general. deberg: I call the question. golem: I would like to get to the two more people in the queue. hartmans: I certainly agree with Steve that SIPB should be advocating for new services. I agree with Joe that SIPB should try to get services that pull in users interested in computing. I think this servcie is not a computing service and the computer aspects are sufficiently mature as to be no longer interesting. DO you think we will attract people interested in other projects unrelated to this film stuff? foley: No, but there are lots of projects you can do related to the film stuff. EKG things and photography algorithms. With a good film scanner you can process the raw image interestingly. hartmans: The issue is sufficiently confused that I have no comments. golem: I would like to insert a comment even though it is horribly illegal and unfair according to the rules I jsut said. foley: This is funny because I already have a scanner. golem: I think the only interesting things about computers today are the peripherals. I would be extremely disappointed if we spent this money on workstations. I would spank you all. kenta: Joe, I assume you know you are going to be the primary person to answer questions. Are you willing to write documentation? foley: I will be around for 2 or 3 years at least, and yes, I will write the documentation, it is failrly easy. jtu: THe dirdctions are on the scanner, so I point eh suers at it. Can I do this for the new thing? foley: Yes. The hardest part is firing up the Mac. foely: I round up to $3000. It might be less, I am assuming the worst. foley: Laura says it will improve her quality of life. golem: We will have a vote. <11-1-2, passes> jhawk: These go on the mac? golem: Yes. It has a DVD/CD burner. foley: That is why we are using the Mac. [foley allocation: $500 for sheet fed scanner] golem: How much does a bullhorn cost? foley: $125? golem: Nevermind. jhawk: You really just want a microphone. We have the technology. We even have shirt clips. golem: We could insert sound effects. kenta: We have a temporary threeholepunch until the drill press comes in. golem: I haven't ordered it yet. We allocated it. Office Cleaning Report: MIT Computing Report: golem: There was an emergency patch release. hartmans: Sendmail sucked again. golem: Everyone was surprised. Computer Services: jhawk: Reylenda crashed mysetriously last week. The outage was painful. We hope it won't recur. sipb-afsreq is taking steps to provide remote console monitoring in a higher degree in the future to catch these things. golem: Wasn't that last week? jhawk: Different server, disk failure. SIPB Backup Report: golem: We had backups of reynelda? hartmans: Yes. Publications Report: golem: There is nothing in iUsenet or iBitmaps. But I don't think they have been there for years. Orientation Report: jtu: Sooner than you think? golem: You werren't supposed to say anything. IAP Report: golem: Very very far away. ike: Sooner thatn you think. nim: No it's not. That's the problem. CokeComm Report: cyruse: Soon I won't be cokecomm. I am giving it to jenselby. Pay her, not me. I'll change the documentation. She doesn't have paypal, so harass her. I told her she should get it. cyruse: One more thing. Your accounts are supposed to be debit, not credit. If your balance is negative pay up. Other: hartmans: Just as a general note of personal frustraion, people who are annoying toward release of security advisories suck ass. kchen: Ask SIPB meeting after this. Other Other: jtu: I am selling shirts. deberg: TSA opened my back and took out your empty washed out aired out fuel bottle. I am really mad. golem: I would like to comment that certain sneaky activities happening in the near future. You should notify prefrosh when that special weekend comes around. Sucks Report: jhawk: Autolisp! int18: Parking! golem: Long meetings! ike: The secretary doesn't suck. The meeting was adjourned at 20:39. Minutes taken and submitted by rax.