In reply to katiej:
This was a point that I brough up 18 months ago. I belive that some people are going back to film. Please tell us more.
I've just spent 2 days at a conference listening to large institutions discuss their digital object preservation plans. It made me think of how many photographer's/ small collections were considering this.
I am creating an archive for a photographer which is very focus on long term preservation of both physical and digital images. I am interested in people working on similar projects or who would like to discuss this further.
Started by katiej, 17:33 Tue 30 Sep 2008 | Profile +++++ | 6 posts
This was a point that I brough up 18 months ago. I belive that some people are going back to film. Please tell us more.
From Chris Summerfield, 16:33 Wed 01 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 1736 posts
I think for shooting my art work, I would still shoot slides because they could be converted to digital when needed but I have something that lasts for as long as I want. For the webpage I shoot digital, only when I sell my art then I take it to shoot slide professionally before giving it to the client. I think in commercial photography, it's got to be digital, because the whole structure of magazine publishing is all digital now. I can't imagine no one has figured out how to preserve the digital images at this point, or ways to convert digital to latest format for preservation sake.
http://fashionartandeverything.blogspot.com/
From KaWai, 17:58 Wed 01 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 1005 posts
Well, going back to film is an option, but I foresee two major problems; 1, How long will it be economically viable for manufactures to keep making it. 2, You're seriously hampering chances to get work out there. Everyone wants digital images, not dupe transparencies. Newspapers/ magazines/ ad agencies may accept it a couple of times, but in every industry speediness is key. Somewhere along the line you're going to have to surrender and get some of your work scanned.
I think the most pressing issue is to respect the digital format. Most of us do not fully understand the technology yet we intrust it with our live(lihood)s. There are groups like the Digital Preservation Coalition- http://www.dpconline.org
promoting awareness through international research. But, although it's provided me with a lot of help it's not very inviting.
From katiej, 21:32 Wed 01 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 6 posts
This is a major headache...and one of my greatest fears. Ultimately a hardcopy like a negative or a transparency will be almost foolproof but it could be hard to comply to using film sometimes. Digital storage is easy but retrieval in the future may pose a problem with compatibility..
From BillySoh, 17:45 Thu 02 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 126 posts
I think transparency is the safest bet, as they could be scanned, for commercial work it's digital(really not a lot of choices, some clients don't care for transparency), and then store in jpg or tiff format that could be viewed in different softwares such as photo shop. I have all my photos now in digital in my hard drive, personal photos, and unless I print them out at some point, or save them on disk or in a separate drive, they have a possibility to be defective due to problems with the hard drive.
http://fashionartandeverything.blogspot.com/
From KaWai, 18:00 Thu 02 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 1005 posts
right now i store all my transparencies in a dry cabinet, and my digital images I have two copies, one on DVD R and one in a removable harddrive...my transparencies are not all scanned, only those selected from the shoots are scanned...so far the dry cabinet is doing its job quite well, as mildew and fungus takes only a couple of weeks or so to start growing.
From BillySoh, 05:17 Fri 03 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 126 posts
I still shoot everything on film and then transfer to digital. The cost on processing has become very expense. Shooting on medium format, I have to try and make every image work. Of course you do not have this with digital. As also mentioned a while back the thought process on getting rid of mistakes comes in to play also. On digital an instant decision could mean that you get rid of something that could have been used for effects at a later date. There are pros and cons for both I know. The thing that holds me back more than anything is costs of materials.
From Chris Summerfield, 10:09 Fri 03 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 1736 posts
Using various storage devices to back up your files is definitely recommended. As long as dvds, cd-roms are kept in optimum conditions (cool, dry, out of direct sunlight etc) then they are pretty reliable. It is very important that you keep a system of opening up files on the dvd. 'Refreshing' is also encouraged, copying data from current DVD to a new one.
From katiej, 10:17 Fri 03 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 6 posts
Another interesting point highlighted last week, was the damage that can be done to eyes sight with long term use of computers.
It has been found that the natural blinking process that cleans and lubricates the eyes slows down when using computers.
This can lead to bacteria and viruses that are damaging to eyes sight over a long period of time seriously affecting your vision. What you’re your views on this. Err hem so to speak.
From Chris Summerfield, 09:53 Mon 06 Oct 2008 | Profile +++++ | 1736 posts