The image that I looked at (the one on security paper) had no portion that I would describe as high-res (color or black text). It was a very poor quality image.
Everyone is arguing that the only document that is available is a microfiche yada yada yada. If there was a printed record, just because the state of HI went all digital does not mean that the original is not still filed somewhere, they were not destroyed, bureaucraps never destroy records.
If it were that simple, they would have simply looked it up and scanned it and release it year ago. There is more to this than that.
From microfiche or microfilm there is no issue with resolution. It is not stored in memory for that purpose. Once it is scanned to a file and burned to the microfiche it is not retained in computer memory. That was the way it was done years ago. Some records probably do exist in a database today, but they are not the document itself, but only the reference information for the document.
The HI Dept. of Health are playing Legal Weasel Word games with us. And Obozo is playing hide the pea under the shell. He has lied all his life and it is his natural mode. Only problem is that with a Lie the pieces never fit and you must constantly change the explanation to cover up information that does not fit. hee hee hee
Of course not. But what the White House released was a PDF. Had they released a 1200dpi uncompressed scan of an 8.5"x11" page, the file would have been rather enormous. What they released was a greatly-compressed PDF. I agree that the resolution on even the bitonal text was pretty crummy, though not as bad as some PDF's I've seen of archival material such as IC datasheets. The bitonal text was IIRC twice the resolution of the color or grayscale material, which would be in line with a program trying to make a readable document in a compact format. Imagine how readable the thing would have been if it were a uniform color bitmap in the same resolution as the color parts of the picture.
Chiyome Fukino has said the paper copy is bound into a book stored somewhere at the Department of Health. She said she has personally examined it twice. And, indeed, the image put out by the White House does look like a copy made by pressing a book down on a copier glass. Not unlike what you'd find at a pre-computer deeds registry. I've visited one or two of those. They have tens of thousands of books, each with hundreds of pages of documents, chained to one another by book, page references.
If it were that simple, they would have simply looked it up and scanned it and release it year ago. There is more to this than that.
They have a law against that. Absent a special court order, only the subject of the document or his close relative or legal representative can get a copy. That's what's enabled Zero to make the most of the controversy.
From microfiche or microfilm there is no issue with resolution. It is not stored in memory for that purpose. Once it is scanned to a file and burned to the microfiche it is not retained in computer memory. That was the way it was done years ago. Some records probably do exist in a database today, but they are not the document itself, but only the reference information for the document.
You got that right.
They should have scanned all their documents at a good resolution (300 dpi?) into a database. They could easily replicate the database on the mainland, in case Mauna Loa blows.
And there's no point in giving out paper documents, anyway. They should just give out links to document images in their database. That way, there would be no room for disputes about what may have been done to a paper document after it left the Health Department.