Preservation of the Moving Image
Becker, S. (2007). See and save: Balancing access and preservation for ephemeral moving images, Media Access: Preservation and Technologies, 27(1), 21-28. Retrieved from http://cinema.usc.edu/assets/096/15670.pdf
The author discusses Home Movie Day (HMD), a yearly community event developed by a handful of members of the Small Gauge and Amateur Film Interest Group (SGAF). The focus is on inspecting and screening filmed home movies in a public venue, where community members can discuss and add value to the film’s historical and/or regional character and significance. The spotlight placed on mundane, innocuous footage could help preservational efforts on the local, archival and or institutional level. Community input is important because it can help assign value to the footage, informing the amount of care and security of the footage that local collections need to consider. Home Movie Day stresses an “access-in-order-to-preserve” approach to preservation, highlighting the role of accessibility in an improved preservation process, which challenges the more traditional preservation motto, “To Preserve, To Show” set forth by the International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF).
Belton, John. (2012). Digital 3D cinema: digital cinema's missing novelty phase. Film History, (24)2, 187+. Academic OneFile. Web. 5 Nov. 2014.
In this essay Belton explores the boom in 3D films that took place around the year 2009. He argues that proponents of digital media pushed for the creation of 3D films in order to supply a missing novelty value in the industry. He concludes that due to the lack of uniformity in display units and certificate issues, the future of 3D films and their preservation is in jeopardy.
Belton, J. (2002). Digital cinema: A false revolution. October, 100, 98-114. doi:10.1162/016228702320218411
In this article Belton highlights some of the important inventions, innovations, and diffusion of technologies and ideas during the digital cinema revolution that started at the turn of the Twenty-first Century. Belton explores how Bazin’s material thrust argument applies to the future of all digital cinema and its implications on film preservation. He concludes that polyester safety film is the ideal medium for the long-term storage of motion-picture images and soundtracks because of its longevity which is estimated at about a hundred years-longer if stored in cold storage. Belton argues that proponents of the digital cinema revolution do not take into account what Bazin factored into his material thrust argument-the obstinate resistance of matter. This means that due of the obsolescent nature of digital media celluloid films will not become obsolete and will continue to have their place in film preservation.
Besser, H. (2001). Digital preservation of moving image material? The Moving Image: The Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists, 1(2), 39-55. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41167061
In this article, Howard Besser documents the shift that is taking place in the way we experience moving images and how this will impact how we preserve those images. He describes how films are created and utilized in a whole new way; they are really a collection of digital elements that have no physical form. This means that they are increasingly being viewed in fragments and reused in new ways not thought of in the past. No longer is a moving image stored on one continuous roll of film, it is bits of digital code that can be manipulated and used in dynamic ways. The user expectation is evolving and changing the way in which preservationists must think about the items they preserve. As the moving image experience changes, the way it is preserved must change. Besser writes about the kinds of elements people expect from their viewing experience; they want deleted scenes, additional commentary, behind the scenes information and the ability to view selected snippets of movies. Preservationists must learn how to capture and preserve all of these essential elements of the moving image experience. Besser then shifts to describing the challenges of dealing with digital assets. He claims no one wants to accept responsibility for them—archivists think they are a part of the domain of the Information Technologists, and IT feel they are the responsibility of the archivists. Besser goes on to describe digital preservation practices and how a digital artifact is different from celluloid film in that it will have multiple instances and does not really represent an original item. This change in focus of the basic embodiment of the moving image requires a new approach to archiving. Besser concludes by stating that film archivists can use many of their skills relating to physical film preservation to continue to preserve our cultural heritage through moving images.
Brand, B. (2012). Artist as archivist in the digital transition. Moving Image, 12(1), 92-95+. Retrieved from Gale Academic OneFile database.
In this article, filmmaker and preservationist Bill Brand looks at how digital technologies can be used to restore and preserve works of avant-garde cinema, both of the analog and born digital varieties. Brand also discusses how the digitization of avant-garde films can create new opportunities for distribution, thus giving artists more chances to reach larger audiences. The article posits that providing entry points to a moving image work through digitization can impact its future sustainability through exposure. Brand concedes that expenses currently prohibit widespread digital preservation efforts, but expresses optimism for the future, noting that as storage and equipment prices drop, restoration efforts will become ultimately become the new norm.
Cave, D. (2008). “Born Digital” - Raised an orphan? Acquiring digital media through an analog paradigm. The Moving Image: The Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists, 8(1), 1-13. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/stable/pdfplus/41167290.pdf?acceptTC=true&jpdConfirm=true
This paper discusses how traditional archival collections as well as methods and practices will change due to the threat of film obsolescence and the inevitable pervasiveness of digital born media. Many archives still have large collections of analog material and the dilemma is to maintain existing analog collections or preserve both analog and digital collections in the future. The cultural trend and expectation is for digital image files and digital downloads, where content can exist without a physical carrier; people have the impression that access to content is limitless because there are multiple means to access and create information. Unfortunately, this runs contrary to the essential nature of the master or original artifact to the archive, since preservation is enabled by duplication but is not ensured by multiplicity. Despite the possible threat of film obsolescence, archives still have a role in finding suitable preservation formats for “orphans,” materials whose copyright owner is either unknown or cannot be traced. The fear is that with shrinking budgets, archives do not have the equipment or infrastructure to preserve material of digital formats and will lose the confidence and support of donors and and rights holders. Cave presents possible solutions for how archives can remain relevant in this digitally-charged environment: balance priorities of maintaining traditional collections and operating under new cultural and technical expectations; second, change their rationale and business approach so that they focus on highlighting their cultural relevance and uniqueness as a film archive.
Charlton, J. (2013). Lights, Camera, Inaction. Information Today, 30(3), 14-15. http://web.b.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3521320c-f65d-40cb-aa66-5ae957e0833c%40sessionmgr110&vid=50&hid=101
John Carlton presents a bleak picture of the European Union’s efforts to digitally preserve their movie heritage. He states that many of the European Union countries are not financially able to fund their digitization projects and the window of opportunity is closing on cost effective digitization efforts. Carlton cites a 2011 research report which predicts an open window of opportunity lasting 7 to 10 years; he states that window is quickly closing. The report also estimated the cost-per-hour to digitize films as being between $673 and $2,690, which he considers too steep for many EU countries. Christensen, T. C. (2002). Preserving digital film. Journal of Film Preservation, 64, 38-40. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/uk/04FIAF64.pdf This article by Thomas C. Christensen discusses the changes that are facing the film archiving profession. The way in which “film” is preserved has changed and continues to change as more and more processes involved in the making of moving images converts to digital. No longer is celluloid film stock the sole means of recording moving images and that fact has caused many changes in the film archiving process. Even the idea of preserving the original and definitive film is in question because of the many formats and versions of films that are produced. Many of the final images on the screen are created digitally and are not found anywhere on a film stock. Christensen states that because of the need to migrate digitally preserved films every 5 to 10 years to new media and of the many man hours required to accomplish this task, digital preservation is not a good choice when compared to traditional film preservation. A film stored on physical film stock and stored in a cold environment will last over a hundred years. Currently, digital preservation is not capable of lasting that long.
Christensen, T. C. (2002). Preserving digital film. Journal of Film Preservation, 64, 38-40. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/uk/04FIAF64.pdf
This article by Thomas C. Christensen discusses the changes that are facing the film archiving profession. The way in which “film” is preserved has changed and continues to change as more and more processes involved in the making of moving images converts to digital. No longer is celluloid film stock the sole means of recording moving images and that fact has caused many changes in the film archiving process. Even the idea of preserving the original and definitive film is in question because of the many formats and versions of films that are produced. Many of the final images on the screen are created digitally and are not found anywhere on a film stock. Christensen states that because of the need to migrate digitally preserved films every 5 to 10 years to new media and of the many man hours required to accomplish this task, digital preservation is not a good choice when compared to traditional film preservation. A film stored on physical film stock and stored in a cold environment will last over a hundred years. Currently, digital preservation is not capable of lasting that long.
Conrad, S. (2012). Analog, the sequel: An analysis of current film archiving practice and hesitance to embrace digital preservation. Archival Issues: Journal Of The Midwest Archives Conference, 34(1), 27-43. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3521320c-f65d-40cb-aa66-5ae957e0833c%40sessionmgr110&vid=34&hid=101
This article by Suzanna Conrad details the current film archiving practices and explains why film archives are not embracing digitization of film as a long-term preservation solution. Conrad begins by describing the current professional practice of making film stock masters and placing them in cold storage for preservation. These films, if stored properly, can be safe for over 100 years. Conrad states that no digital archive is able to match that for secure longevity. In the article, Conrad interviews the curator of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and presents findings from the Academy’s 2007 report on the state of digital archiving. The Academy does not see digital preservation as reliable and stable as it requires migration and is more susceptible to error than the current practice of preserving film stock. The Academy’s report details how even digital movies are being recorded onto film stock as a means of preservation. It does acknowledge that more and more films are being produced using digital technologies and some of the secondary material crucial to the completion of a film are only available in digital format and cannot be archived by recording to film stock. Conrad concludes that strategies and standards will need to be developed within the profession before a complete transition to digital preservation can occur.
Crofts, C. (2008). Digital decay. Moving Image: The Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists, 8(2), xii+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA197106654&v=2.1&u=lom_waynesu&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=5fd6be6a8b662f75afb9b57671138cc0
This article explores the threat of digital projection to the viability of the 35mm release print as well as its impact on film stock production and how this will affect film preservation. The article draws on the insights garnered from interviews Crofts conducted during the course of one of her practice-based research projects which documented the impact of digital technologies on the feature film industry. Some of the interviewed include leaders of key UK film companies such as Clive Ogden at Kodak, Jeff Allen, managing director of Panavision, and Lionel Runkel at Technicolor. Crofts argues that it is the responsibility of academics and archivists to be at the forefront of the debate over the preservation of film and to unpack the various nuances and implications of digital technologies at all levels of the process, and not let the shift be driven solely by corporate technology conglomerates.
De Stefano, P. (2003). Moving image preservation in libraries. Library Trends, 52(1), 118-132. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/docview/220449570?accountid=14925
In this article Paula De Stefano describes the current state of affairs in libraries regarding the preservation of moving images. She states that most libraries have no formal protocol for film and video preservation. Most also do not have the financial means to put a program in place to preserve them. She further states that it requires special knowledge and skills to manage moving image collections and these are in short supply in libraries as well. While most libraries have the technology necessary to preserve paper based material they have not been able to include moving image material under their umbrella of preservation. De Stefano believes this to be because moving image preservation is far more complex than that of paper based materials. The many formats of film and video make preservation challenging, but the equipment needed and the technical skills and knowledge needed to operate it makes the challenge even greater. To make matters even worse, there are currently no agreed upon standards for the preservation of moving images. De Stefano ends the article by stating the need for more research in order to establish standard preservation practices for moving images.
Desmet, N., Read, P. (2003). Colour separations for film restoration and preservation - today, and in a digital world. Journal of Film Preservation, 66(10), 25-31. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/uk/04FIAF66.pdf
Authors Desmet and Read are optimistic about the prospects of digital restoration as it relates to treating faded colour negative and print and reconstructing “digital” film negatives. The implementation of digital techniques and image software, like Discreet Inferno, Pandora Megadef image controller and Philips Spirit Datacine, can help improve the processes, related to sizing and orienting, as well as the quality of recombined color film negatives.
Fletcher, A. & Yumibe, J.(2013). From nitrate to digital archive: The Davide Turconi project. The Moving Image, 13(1), 1-32. Retrieved November 7, 2014, from Project MUSE database.
In this case study, the authors examine how digitization of celluloid can prove invaluable, not just from a preservation perspective, but also from an academic one. The digitization of frames from the David Turconi silent film collection allowed for the celluloid images to be viewed as newly contextualized clippings, thus expanding the horizons of scholars and students alike. To quote the authors: “digital technologies allow viewers to stop the flow of cinematic time more easily, to see the still image at the push of the pause button, which re-enlivens questions of stillness, movement, and time at the heart of the cinematic apparatus (p. 19).” The digitization of this collection transforms the nature of the frames, and allows users to confront what makes the images compelling on a visceral level.
Gracy, K. F. (2007). Moving image preservation and cultural capital. Library Trends. 56(1), 183. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/journals/library_trends/v056/56.1gracy.html
In her article, Karen Gracy describes how the internet and video sharing are changing the environment of moving image preservation. She considers the possibility that in the future moving image preservation may not be performed exclusively by libraries and archives. She suggests other interested parties may also create moving image archives through social media and links to material located throughout the World Wide Web. She describes evolving technology on the internet that offers new models for preservation of the moving image. She goes on to state that images are being re-imagined and incorporated into new works. In the new cultural view she describes, moving images are considered building blocks for creativity and free speech. She believes this to be a new democratic model for creating an archive and it will change the way all future moving image preservation will be performed.
Gracy, K. F. (2003). Documenting the Process of Film Preservation [Electronic version]. The Moving Image, 3(1), 1-41.
This article summarizes the process of the preservation of film as a series of sequential steps that include specific decision points and results in measurable outputs at various stages along the way. She documents the specific tasks of archivists, curators amongst others. Ultimately this is an attempt on Gracy’s part to lay the foundations of uniformity by sharing a comprehensive system for the preservation of film.
Grosz, C. (2012, January 2). Reel need to preserve: Martin Scorsese recently spoke with Variety's Christy Grosz about his passion for film preservation and why it's a vital issue for Hollywood. Daily Variety, 314(1), 1+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA277435458&v=2.1&u=lom_waynesu&it=r&p=STND&sw=w&asid=9793359bbe42e2e97614481951ad511f
In this interview prominent director Martin Scorsese discusses some of the issues of moving images. He points out that 75% of silent film was lost not because of rhetoric or propaganda but because of poor storage and deterioration. He argues that the preservation of digital films is just as important as that of celluloid. He calls all interested parties to act now in order to preserve the heritage and culture in all formats of films.
Horwath, A. (2012). Persistence and mimicry: The digital era and film collections. Journal of Film Preservation, 86, 21-28. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/JFP/jfp-86lr.pdf
This article by Alexander Horwath begins with a description of the state of the film preservation profession. Horwath describes a profession unsure of its future. He describes how film preservationists are worried they might not be up to the challenges they face with regards to the technological changes occurring within their profession. Horwath feels everyone should relax. He goes on to say that cultural institutions have already begun to incorporate the new digital ways into their work. He describes the gradual implementation of digital techniques into these institutions, such as, digitizing still images, collecting certain born-digital artifacts, and using digital film restoration practices. So, even though these cultural heritage institutions feel a threat from the digital presence in the creation of films, they have been utilizing the current technologies as they have proven beneficial to their work. Horwath feels that the film archives of today and the future will still be a place to preserve the experience of watching a film, even if the “film” is no longer part of the equation. He believes the film archiving profession is up to the challenge of evolving and changing with the new technologies while still preserving the film experience.
Knight, J. (2012). Archiving, distribution, and experimental moving image histories. The Moving Image, 12(1), 65-86. Retrieved November 7, 2014, from Project MUSE database.
This article examines how resources such as UbuWeb, REWIND, FVDD, and others can be used to create digital archives for moving images. Using the Film and Video Distribution Database as an example, Knight explores the different processes digital archivists must navigate, including selection, copyright issues, and long-term sustainability. The article also discusses how user bases must be developed and maintained for online repositories, for the sake of both digital access and support for offline collections. Knight also cautions that digitization alone is no guarantee of long-lasting preservation, and that the resources described will need to eventually incorporate migration functions in order to be optimally effective.
Lindner, J. (2009). Preserving film (on film) in a digital age. Journal of the Moving Image, 13-25. Retrieved from http://www.jmionline.org/articles/2009/preserving_film_on_film__in_a_digital_age.pdf
Josef Lindner examines the problems film archivists face in the digital era, professionals who are responsible for curating and preserving moving images and who have very specific technical and practical tools. Unfortunately, film archivists share many challenges, including film obsolescence, format obsolescence and the burgeoning interest in digital cinema, and they do not have an established method for preserving digital movies. Archiving film may be a slow process, but it is defined by its shared procedures, standards and practices that have been established and used commonly around the world. Commercial filmmaking sometimes overshadows non-traditional filmmaking that requires the use of different preservation procedures. Lindner goes on to describe the process of preserving films and first defines a few terms: conservation (continuous part of archival work); preservation (protecting a work by making film masters); restoration (managing the return of materials to their original state); and reconstruction (using materials or evidence to reform a material). Film archivists will have to learn to exist in this ‘hybrid era’ where digital and analog materials co-exist and will need to adapt quickly when cinema becomes entirely digital.
Maltz, A. (2014, March). How do you store a digital movie for 100 years? IEEE Spectrum, 51(3), 40-44. doi: 10.1109/MSPEC.2014.6745882
This article addresses the changing landscape of cinematic preservation, as film moves from its celluloid state to being “born digital.” Unlike celluloid, which can last in cold storage for at least 100 years, digital film is new territory and has no fixed method of preservation. Maltz looks at the many hurdles digital film preservationists face, including storage space, rapid evolution of technology, and cost, and offers potential solutions. Maltz also discusses how format standards via Academy Color Encoding System (ACES) is helping to eliminate format ambiguity and instill a sense of preservation even as filmmaking occurs. As the article states: “Selected raw footage gets converted into the ACES format, which renders it clearly interpretable at any later step in the moviemaking process…[yielding] a usable archival master in a digital form. (p. 44). By strictly following the ACES standards documents that the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers have published, Maltz notes that filmmakers are automatically contributing to the preservation of their work as it’s being created.
Mashon, M. (2002). Film preservation at the Library of Congress. College & University Media Review, 8(2), 15-27.
This article delineates the Library of Congress’s efforts to preserve a sizable majority of the countries motion picture and television heritage. Mashon provides an overview of this project and shares the Library of Congress’s plans for dealing with rapidly evolving standards in a digital future. Mashon argues that celluloid fill will inevitably become obsolete and that it is the responsibility of all to ensure that the same does not happen to the various formats of digital films.
O’English, M., Bond, T. J. (2011) Providing online access to historic films at the Washington State University libraries, Library Hi Tech, 29(2), 210 – 223
This paper discusses the procedures and methods developed at the Washington State University to digitize and make accessible historic moving images. Bond and O’English focus on low-cost technologies that transfer analog film to digital formats. They argue that digitization of celluloid films is the best preservation method available and insist that the benefits outweigh the expense and labor involved.
Rao, N. (2010). Representation and ethics of moving image archives. The Moving Image, 10(2), Fall 2010, 104-123. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/journals/the_moving_image/v010/10.2.rao.pdf
Nina Rao states that archives have welcomed the role of custodian for both the intellectual content and physical package of objects, but ethical concerns related to exhibition and access have been largely ignored in the film archiving field. The Fédération Internationale des Archives du Film (FIAF) and Associating of Moving Image Archivists (AMIA) developed and adopted codes of ethics in recent years, those of which are discussed in the paper as sample guidelines for professional practice. This paper raises a series of questions and concerns of the archiving community related to privacy restrictions (archives should consult with the donor but also follow guidelines set out by the Society of American Archivists (SAA) and the like); informed consent (there is a power imbalance between the filmmaker and the subject); ownership and the rights of stakeholders (different organizations have different opinions about this matter and the rights to the productions are not shared accordingly); and conflicting interests that impede access (historical/artistic value of archival materials vs. sacred cultural or personal meaning). Establishing meaning and a context as well as an interpretation of the material can shorten the distance between audience and content; archives have the “ethical responsibility” to establish relevant contexts for their viewing audiences and to encourage understanding and cultural awareness.
Read, P. (2004). “Film archives on the threshold of a digital era”: Technical issues from the EU FIRST project. Journal of Film Preservation, 68, 32-45. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/uk/fiaf68.pdf
This article by Paul Read details the European Union FIRST Project, which published a report detailing the state of film preservation in Europe and offered guidelines and recommendation to assist in the future work of digitizing the film archives of Europe. The author states that the findings are directly relevant to Europe, but many of the findings are broadly applicable to other film archives. The beginning of the article paints a bleak picture of preserving the film heritage of Europe. The factors and costs involved in storing film-based moving images are detailed and compared to those involved in storing digital moving images. There are many concerns for either means of storing. This article details the technical state of film and digital archiving and lists all of the pros and cons of each. The FIRST report suggests that physical film archiving is the best long-term solution to preservation, but digitization of the film is the best solution for greater public access to the films. The FIRST article then lists extensive guidelines on how best to utilize digital technology in film preservation.
Schüller, P. (2009). Video archiving and the dilemma of data compression. International Preservation News, 47, 5-7. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/pac/IPN_47_web.pdf
In this 2009 article, Dr. Schüller of the Austrian Academy of Sciences covers the brief technical history of the growing practice of data compression (data reduction) and subsequently discusses a new preservation approach to archiving video recordings: forgoing data compression in favor of non-compressed file formats. Data compression has been widely applied in the field of video archiving since the 1980s, non-compression appears to be more logistically viable and financially prudent. Video recordings are unique in that they hold large amounts of data and their formats and carriers were not developed for stability over longer periods; thus, they depend on the availability of equipment and regular maintenance support. Format obsolescence as well as replay equipment obsolescence have been constant challenges to video archiving endeavors.
Singh, R. (2009). Digital preservation of mass media artifacts: Technologies and challenges. Journal of Digital Asset Management, 5(4), 185-195. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/dam.2009.12
The purpose of this article is to establish guidelines for “an integrated approach to producing sustainable digital assets with graceful access for better return on investment and distribution,” specifically for audiovisual broadcast archives (p. 185). Singh argues that access is the most important facet in this endeavor, and that digitization can foster access in ways no other preservation methods can. The article also addresses the importance of archive management, metadata access, and information delivery.
Smith, A. (2007). Valuing Preservation. Library Trends, 56(1), 4-25. doi: 10.1353/lib.2007.0059
Using moving images as one prime example of materials needed to preserved, this article explores how preservation efforts are valued in modern society. Author Abby Smith compares analog and digital methods of stewardship, and then examines the various challenges the latter faces in becoming the method of choice. She then offers ideas to ensure that digital preservation is valued, such as enacting legislation, making digitization more affordable, and providing incentives and rewards for preservation efforts.
Usai, P. C. (2013). The digital future of pre-digital film collections. Journal of Film Preservation, 88, 9-16. Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/JFP88_Web.pdf
This article by Paolo Cherchi Usai begins with a summary of the history of film preservation and the notion in the industry that films are copies of masters and the copies do not need to be handled carefully. The main focus of film preservation has been to preserve the masters so duplicates can be made periodically. Since the use, or even handling of the films, degrades them it was initially thought that digital preservation would eliminate the problem of copying. However, as Usai details in his article, digital preservation is more vulnerable to corruption and technical obsolescence than physical film. The article goes on to describe all the various uses and terms connected with digital preservation, such as, digital restoration, digitization, and digital preservation. Usai explains that the film archiving profession does not have necessary standards and practices in place which would help the profession and others understand the limitations and potential of digital processes when they are applied to film preservation. This uncertain state of affairs is even more urgent, according to Usai, because more and more films are being born-digital and soon these issues will need to be addressed. Usai concludes the article with a call to action for film repositories to define their new place in the field of digital preservation and to let the world know where they stand when it comes to the preservation of the moving image.
Usai, P. C. (2011). The lindgren manifesto: The film curator of the future. Journal of Film Preservation, (84), 4.
In this speech Usai lists the reasons for and current issues that revolve around the preservation of moving images. He argues that restoration of film is not desirable, content is not the most important determining factor, and that the world in general is not interested in the preservation of film. He also notes that digital is an endangered medium and migration is its terminal disease. Because of this digital moving images must be saved more intensively than film.
Usai, P. C. (2009). Are all (analog) films "Orphans"? A predigital appraisal. Moving Image, 9(1), 1+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA209043914&v=2.1&u=lom_waynesu&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=f1cef668ac9a3bbcdbf786ec379da132
In these speech Usai discusses the status of film prints as “orphans”. He argues that a culture of curatorship will drive and holds accountable archives and museums. He states that this accountability should not be feared but embraced in two ways. First, by leaning and refining the art of selection and preservation. Secondly, emphasize that selection and preservation should consider not only content but formats as well.
Wallmüller, J. (2007). Criteria for the use of digital technology in moving image restoration. The Moving Image, 7(1), 78-91. doi: 10.1353/mov.2007.0032
As the title would suggest, this article seeks to establish criteria for the use of digital technology in moving image restoration. In order to facilitate this goal, author Julia Wallmüller offers a glossary of official terminology critical to digital film preservation, and then dissects the digital preservation process in a step-by-step breakdown that addresses important factors such as documentation and DIAMANT (software) capacity. Wallmüller stresses that these steps are especially important for moving image preservation, as anything that might hamper the “moving” aspect the material would render it something different entirely, thus destroying the purpose of preservation.
Walsh, D. (2008). How to Preserve Your Films Forever. The Moving Image: The Journal of the Association of Moving Image Archivists, 8(1), 38-41.
In this article Walsh writes about the difficulties of preserving film. He states that film is ephemeral in nature and that it is only kept alive by intensive effort. He argues that film is a poor access medium because it is cumbersome to transport, easily damaged, and unsuitable for random access. Due to these facts, Walsh believes that film is doomed and steps must be taken find another format to preserve moving images.
Walsh, D. (2006). Do we need film? Journal of Film Preservation, 72, 4-8 Retrieved from http://www.fiafnet.org/pdf/uk/fiaf72.pdf
In this article David Walsh debates whether we need physical film in order to preserve the film viewing experience. He states that the audience is generally unaware of what is happening behind them and do not care what vehicle delivers the moving image they are viewing. He writes about the original authentic movie viewing experience and states that preservationists work to maintain the feel of watching original film even when they are working with digitally re-mastered works. He goes on to describe how through digital restoration old films can be viewed in such a pristine state that they look like they were filmed yesterday. He states that audiences regard this kind of restoration as fake. Walsh finishes the article by describing how digital technology can be used to copy and restore film to a state which surpasses the original theatrical performance, but suggests this might be going too far. He ends by detailing the pros and cons of storing physical film and digital media. He states that the storage of physical film is expensive and becoming obsolete, while digital media requires maintenance and migration and claims no winner, as of yet, in the debate over which is the best preservation solution.
Wengström, J. (2013). Access to film heritage in the digital era - challenges and opportunities. Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy (NJCP), 16(1), 125-136. Retrieved from http://www.idunn.no/file/pdf/61113205/Access_to_film_heritage_in_the_digital_era_Challenges_and.pdf
Wengström presents a balanced perspective on the digitization of filmmaking and film itself, stating that it creates opportunities to better access the content of digital media in comparison to the difficulty of maintaining the deteriorating quality of analog film elements. The author quickly emphasizes that film archives and film museums have undertaken preservation activities all with the aim to give access to archival collections. He states that film is a unique media form in that the original object or artifact is never circulated in the collection; rather its duplicate, or copy of the original, is shared. After noting the risks involved with handling original film objects, the author shares some benefits to the digitization of film, including: increased access to archive collection materials,given that digital copies could be made without damaging the original copies, as well as increased visibility and use of the archive and parts of its collections that were previously unseen or unheard of. According to Wengström, long-term access to analog film materials would be futile; film prints would be worn and would need to be replaced eventually; archives and museums would need regular maintenance support and/or nearby photochemical laboratory facilities to assist with duplication creation. A challenge facing archives and museums in the future is retaining the business of rights holders (to convince them to deposit their materials to the archives) as well as getting the support from copyright legislation. The author’s conclusion is that digital technology widens possibilities for film distribution and increases the visibility of the work and services of archives and museums.
Wright, R. (2012). Preserving moving pictures and sound: DPC technology watch report.
http://www.dpconline.org/newsroom/latest-news/859-new-dpc-tech-watch-report-preserving-moving-pictures-and-sound
The moving pictures and sound landscape is complicated in various ways, physically, there are large differences between audio, film and video recordings. There are also significant preservation and curation differences among these media collections. Within the landscape of digital film are other moving parts, such as a range of technologies that are involved in the process: internet technology, archiving, media management, curation, preservation, access and resource discovery. There are physical risks involved in conservation: audio, video and film are at immediate risk from obsolescence of formats and equipments (film museums and archives will no longer have the equipment and/or maintenance support to address this obsolescence).
Wright, R. (2004). Digital preservation of audio, video and film. Vine, 34(2), 71-76. doi: 10.1108/03055720410550869
In this article, author Richard Wright strives to develop a consensus on the preservation strategy for film and video media, along the lines of what already exists in the realm of audio preservation. Wright establishes that high-resolution digitization and mass storage is the preferred outcome, but that barriers such as cost are inhibiting widespread adoption. Wright looks at several case studies of broadcast media preservation at the BBC and then uses the lessons learned from those experiences to suggest a concrete set of strategies and solutions for film preservation, such as using automatic film splicers in tandem with high-resolution scanning equipment or transferring content to DVDs.
