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

Re: digitization projects grant guidelines



I completely agree with Dean on this one.  In fact, NEDCC teaches a class on
"To Film or To Scan" that basically argues the same point-- digitization is
great for access, but is NOT a recommended format for long-term preservation
of your collections.  So, if you're going to digitize, they strongly
recommend that you microfilm as well as part of the overall digitization
project.

Think about it-- how many times in the last five years have you updated your
software or hardware?  Every time that happens you will also have to migrate
over all of your digital files to be compatible with the new
software/hardware.  Not only is digitization not recommended for
preservation, it is also extremely cost-prohibitive.

Just my 2 cents.

--Sammie Morris


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean DeBolt [SMTP:ddebolt@MAIL.UWF.EDU]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:06 AM
> To:   ARCHIVES@LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU
> Subject:      Re: digitization projects grant guidelines
>
> Granting agencies may indeed be allowing digitization in lieu of
> microfilming, but this, in my opinion, is a terrible mistake.  Micro-
> film has a proven longevity of nearly a century (and longer, per
> laboratory tests), especially if care is taken to provide for multiple
> copies (master negative, duplicating negative, positives).
>
> The key problem to digitization is that the "copy" is an electronic
> digital file.  In order to read that file for printing (at any point in
> the future), you need a compatible operating system, computer,
> software, and printer.    And given the rapid change of all of these
> components, I believe (with dismay) that any digital image created
> will probably be unusable/unreadable at a "very soon" point in
> the future.   The entire purpose of preservation is to insure that
> information is permanently captured for the future.    Digitization,
> to me, does not do that -- it DOES permit access and manipulation
> of data (such as sharing files, transmission, etc.)....but it is not
> preservation.
>
> Digital technologists will point out that, in their view, it is
> preservation
> so long as you migrate the data from format to format.  In short, if
> you began with an Edison wax cylinder recording, you would then
> have copied that onto a 78 phonograph record, then only a 33 1/3
> vinyl disc, then onto an 8-track recording, then onto a reel-to-reel
> tape, then onto an audiocasette, then onto a digital tape, etc.
> This sounds quite reasonable, even with the loss of quality with
> each generation.
>
> But my argument is that none of us -- professionally and personally
> -- will ever have each generation of equipment and the time, staff,
> and money to insure that everything we had in the previous generation
> is moved to the new generation.   That is, I believe, the danger of
> the myth of digitization as preservation.
>
> As I write these, I am reminded that every office of my University now
> has digital cameras -- public relations, athletics, art department, etc.
> and they are busy taking photographs of events, buildings, people,
> and often posting these to their websites.   The individual digital files
> reside on dozens (if not hundreds) of different computers, servers,
> floppy disks, zap disks, etc., often in the possession of different
> staff.    And yes, I despair, as an archivist of capturing the visual
> university record so that fifty years from now when someone wants
> to do a website, book, newsletter, television production of the
> "good old days" in 2001 ... where will these visual records be?
>
> I apologize if I sound discouraged.   Digital cameras are "cool" and
> I like being able to see what has been "photographed."  But a decade
> from now when the family gathers at Thanksgiving and wants to see
> the older family pictures, they may be totally lost on a defunct
> electronic
> medium.
>
> If you are going for preservation, continue to microfilm AND digitize.
> (photograph and digital photograph) for the optimum situation of
> preservation of information.
>
> Dean
>
> Dean DeBolt
> University Librarian
> Special Collections and West Florida Archives
> John C. Pace Library
> University of West Florida
> 11000 University Parkway
> Pensacola, FL  32514-5750
> Tele:  850-474-2213;   Fax:  850-474-3338
>
> 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>

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>