[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Film vs CD Revisited



Late that week I published a message to this group that has garnered more
than a few responses taking me to task for my statement that CDs can have a
life 2 to 3 times that of film.  Allow me, please, to clarify my comments.

First of all, I will readily acknowledge that many films will have a life of
1200 years or more if preserved in ideal, pristine conditions.  Quite
obviously, CD-ROMs are not going to compete with that.  However.....

My experience has been that many libraries and archives cannot afford to
maintain ideal conditions.  Acid-free materials, climate-controlled locked
vaults, specially trained technicians dressed in booties and lint-free attire
are simply beyond most budgets.  My "real world" experience has been of
filing cabinets with strips of negatives or sleeves of slides (primarily E6);
of researchers (often interns) meaning well but not always understanding the
consequences of naturally occurring oils from fingertips or prolonged
exposure to light tables.  I submit that under such conditions, the life
expectancy of film is significantly less than 1200 years.

In many libraries and archives of my acquaintance, E6 slide films will begin
to experience color shift in 5 years; 10 at the outside.  Kodachrome
transparencies will maintain color fidelity for 50 to 60 years if stored in a
cool (not cold), dark place.  For the moment, let us not discuss 8 x 10 B&W
prints in green pendaflex file folders.

Gold-based CD-ROMs from Kodak and certain other manufacturers will have a
life of at least 100 years without loss of data integrity.  They do not
require the pristine conditions of film to achieve this.  This statement is
based on aging studies published by Kodak (an admittedly biased source); the
studies may be found on the Kodak website (www.kodak. com).

There has also been much comment regarding the life of CD-ROM as a storage
medium.  I agree with those who point out that CDs will eventually go the way
of piano rolls or 5 1/4" diskettes.  So...plan for it.  The migration of data
should not be a major issue.  Assume, for example, that 8 years ago you had
scanned your collection and saved the files on a series of 3 1/2" disks.
Would it really be that big a problem, today, to move those files to a CD, or
a server?  Certainly the cost of such data migration would be significantly
less than, first, putting your collection on microfilm and, second, scanning
that microfilm.  And you would have had the additional benefit of having been
able to use the data files for these past 8 years, while keeping the
originals out of harm's way.

So, in light of all this, I stand by my original comments when I suggested
that Renee should not microfilm her collection but that she should, instead,
digitize it.  It is, in my opinion, the most cost-effective and efficient
way, now available to us, of recording and preserving content.

Jim Lewin
President
Image Delivery Systems
Suite 200
1101 Pennsylvania Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20003
vox: 202.544.6884
fax: 202.544.6889

A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List!

To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to listserv@listserv.muohio.edu
      In body of message:  SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname
                    *or*:  UNSUB ARCHIVES
To post a message, send e-mail to archives@listserv.muohio.edu

Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html

Problems?  Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <rschmidt@lib.muohio.edu>