Copy Your Digital Photos Onto Film

#1 GARY POGODA

Seems like a step backward, like copying your CDs to vinyl. Loss of
data is much more of an issue with analog vs. digital media.

I also do not buy the argument that today's digital standards may not
be read by future hardware and software. Even if that were the case,
it is not difficult to convert from one digital standard to another, which
would be a lossless conversion, unlike the conversion to analog.

Not to mention the ease of digital cataloging and searching compared
to that of film. Any advantages of film would be as an image "capture"
medium, not as an image "storage" medium.

6:40 pm - Monday, September 19, 2005

#2 Antonio

"it is not difficult to convert from one digital standard to another"

But when you're dead, who is going to do the copying? There's no guarantee that someone will maintain out digital archives long into the future. If the images are in an analog form, at least they can still be seen by future generations. At least they might end up in someone's shoe box.

If they can make it cheap enough, I think it's a great idea so that we can archive those special images which we do not want lost over time.

10:10 pm - Monday, September 19, 2005

#3 pippo

non sanno più cosa inventare...

7:25 am - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#4 GARY POGODA

Antonio, what's this about me dying? What aren't you telling me?

When it comes to film preservation, much of the detail is masked by
the innocent phrase "well maintained". It might be a far simpler task
to preserve a couple Macs.

Pippo, accosento.

7:40 am - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#5 Antonio

"It might be a far simpler task to preserve a couple Macs."

Preserving Macs is one thing, preserving the hard drives or DVDs that the images are stored on is something else.

A box of prints stored in a closet somewhere requires a lot less maintenance then any electronic storage medium we have access to today. The box of prints can be forgotten for a hundred years of so and, when found, people would know exactly what they were looking at. I doubt that in a hundred years people will know what a DVD is or what to do with it.

An image is something that all people can relate to no matter how old the image is (look at hieroglyphs, for instance).

Now, of course, this only works if the images are archival in the first place. But I guess that this device would create an image that would long outlast any mechanical or optical storage device we have today.

2:08 pm - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#6 phule

Backing up to DVD is a dead-end solution.

Keeping your data on multiple rolling backups like external hard drives is a far better solution. When the storage medium changes, you can easily and quickly copy the contents to the new device(s) and discard the hard drives.

3:06 pm - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#7 GARY POGODA

When Carsten Chadt speaks of "well maintained traditional film", I do
not believe that he was talking about a shoe box in a closet, unless of
course you were referring to an airtight shoe box, placed in a subzero
temperature, climate-controlled closet.

6:08 pm - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#8 Drew Broadley

Optical backup has a lifespan of 10 years (less if accidentally left in sunlight), backup of data onto HDD is as reliable as a bull in a china shop unless you pay out your buttox and get a RAID5 solution (which needs constant maintenance).

I'd much prefer to backup my digital photos to film and make duplicates of it while i'm at it. I've still got film from the 80's which makes perfectly good prints. Now that CD from the 90s, well.. it's brown and refuses to read on any of my five CD/DVD ROM's. A HDD from 10 years ago, bring on hte 1.2gig hdd.. that's a whole 1gig CF photo shoot and oh look.. it's not working anymore.

8:53 pm - Tuesday, September 20, 2005

#9 GARY POGODA

Wait a hundred years and see how well that film prints. It seems you
are underestimating the difficulty and expense involved with color film
preservation. And even with perfect analog preservation, you still will
not be able to recover your digital images without loss.

I would be more inclined to save a binary representation of my digital
images to black and white film.

4:59 am - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#10 Ehma

Once ! received photographs from my grand mother and i was happy to discoverd how she lived and how was live in her time.

If my grand mother did like american did on nineties i should have got nothing and i'll dont know about her live.

What minox done is not stupid and i'll be happy my childrens should look at our life as they want.

6:26 am - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#11 GARY POGODA

But what about your grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc.? Your
photos won't last that long, but kids will still be toting their iPods, or
similar picture viewer of the future.

7:01 am - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#12 Zoltán Árva-Tóth

Gary, in the late 1980s, I had a Commodore Plus/4 - PCs and Macs were on the Cocom list and we were still a Communist country then - and wrote a few small programs just for fun. Now there is no way for me to use these programs. Yes, there are Commodore Plus/4 emulators available for PCs, but the programs are stored on big 5.25" floppy disks and - believe it or not - magnetic tapes that none of today's devices can read :(

So changes in technology can indeed cause electronically stored data to become unavailable for human viewing/use. You or I cannot know what technology is going to be used for coding, decoding and viewing images in future. (I personally sense that iPods are nothing but a passing whim, for instance.)

Nevertheless, you are right in that preserving film, and especially colour film, can be a challenge. But copying your digital photos unto film has another advantage that curiously goes un-mentioned in the Minox press release: projection. Current multi-media projectors, even prohibitively expensive ones, offer ridiculously low resolution. They are no match for projected slides. At the same time, the resolution of sensors found in digital cameras is getting very high. 8mp cameras are commonplace, and even the first sub-$1000 10+ mp camera has been announced. The detail captured by such a sensor - with the help of a good lens - is very close to the max detail that can be captured on, say, a Provia 100F. If you want to see your pics real big, you need to project them, and copying them on reversal film for framing and projection is a MUCH better option than using one of these pathetic and horribly expensive multi-media projectors.

The only thing I do not understand about this piece of news is why exactly it is news. A local lab has been offering such a service for years. Am I missing something?

8:57 am - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#13 GARY POGODA

Zoltán, I think the "news" is in the pixel-by-pixel copying technology.

Software obsolescence is a complex issue, having to do much more
with good software engineering than with preservation. For example,
one advantage of high level languages is their portability. If you wrote
your programs in machine language, then yes, you would need to use
a 7501 emulator. However, if you wrote your programs in BASIC, then
you would be able to run them on virtually any machine with little or no
modification, that is, unless you used hardware specific code, such as
accessing the Plus/4's SID chip and/or its Sprites.

But let's say that you were an excellent Software Engineer, who knew
you would eventually want to port your programs to another computer,
so you took precautions to write your programs in BASIC, and avoided
using any of the Plus/4's built-in hardware features. If you now wanted
to port the programs to your PC, it would be a simple matter to transfer
them via the Plus/4's RS-232 Port and Modem 300. And if you did not
happen to save your computer, cassette drive, floppy drive, or modem,
they are all still widely available on the Internet.

Assuming that the price is right, there is no reason to avoid transferring
cherished photos to film, for the purpose of sticking them in a shoe box,
or for use in projection. Just make sure you save the original digitals.

6:39 pm - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#14 Drew Broadley

GARY,

I'm not underestimating the preservation of film like you're underestimating the preservation of copy after copy of binary information. Each time you make a copy there is error-correction performed and the integrity of the file degrades each time you "copy and paste".

Analogue will ALWAYS be better than digital.

6:54 pm - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#15 GARY POGODA

You could make 100 digital generation copies, and still not notice any
degradation. Try that with analog.

7:03 pm - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#16 Drew Broadley

You wouldn't _need_ to make 100 copies of analogue because that original copy would be around over 10 fold what the digital copy would survive for.

You really need to look up the facts about digital preservation of data compared to analogue preservation. You will find, even though it needs to be a "cold store", it will cost less in the long run to preserve and you dont have to put up with corruptions over binary backups over generations of hardware.

7:15 pm - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#17 GARY POGODA

Which is worse, having to make 100 digital copies, or having to pay
the electric bill for centuries of refrigeration?

7:36 pm - Wednesday, September 21, 2005

#18 pez

Not a recent but I think still a pertinent article on how another industry is tackling the analog vs digital archiving issue --

'Labels Strive to Rectify Past Archival Problems'
Holland, D; Billboard Magazine, 1997
http://www.billholland.net/words/vault.html

Here's an excerpt and quote from the article -

'At this writing, the major label companies have taken different approaches to archival storage, but most have programs to back up heriotage material in both digital and analog formats.'

"Anybody who doesn't back up their digital masters with analog could be making a big mistake," said one leading archivist, "At least you know for sure analog tape has lasted 30, 40 years."

2:32 am - Thursday, September 22, 2005

#19 pez

May be of interest - an article discussing the use of Apple's Bento and Avid Technology's OMF technologies as media 'preservation formats' --

'TOWARD A UNIVERSAL DATA FORMAT FOR THE PRESERVATION OF MEDIA'
MacCarn, D
WGBH Educational Foundation, USA; 2000
http://info.wgbh.org/upf/papers/SMPTE_UPF_paper.html

2:38 am - Thursday, September 22, 2005

#20 GARY POGODA

Pez, those papers are interesting, but not relevant to this discussion
for the following reasons.

(1) As you pointed out, those papers are outdated (1996 and 1997).
They are concerned with the problems of "tape" storage, a medium
which no one is advocating here.

(2) Those papers deal with "industrial" information storage, which is
a nightmare due to the sheer volume of data involved, regardless of
the storage medium or format being used.

The point of the above article was that individual photographers will
make use of this analog film service to safeguard their digital photos.
My preference would be to preserve my digital memories completely
within the digital domain.

7:31 am - Thursday, September 22, 2005

#21 GARY POGODA

BTW, I forgot to ask, what is your opinion on this?

7:11 pm - Thursday, September 22, 2005

#22 pez

>BTW, I forgot to ask, what is your opinion on this?

My opinion - well this saying comes to mind “It is the soothing thing about history that it does repeat itself” (Gertrude Stein). I certainly believe that taking a look at how other industries grapple with such issues (obsolescence, media decay aka ‘shelf life’) can be illuminating.

I did a quick count of the types of ‘self-recorded’ media that I have squirreled away at home - just the physical types, not counting the recording/storage formats used on each - containing all sorts of multi-media stuff (text, graphics, audio recordings, photographs, movie & video recordings, etc) - total count was 15. Everything from - half & 1/4-plate glass negatives; 35mm negatives & reversal transparencies; 8mm movie film; Betamax, VHS & Video 8 tapes; computer printouts; 2.5” floppy disks; DAT DDS; CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-R; etc. Along the way I have discarded material on - compact cassette tape; open reel audio tape; 8” & 5.25” floppy disk; 9-track and QICK data storage tapes. Mostly this was when I lost interest in the contents, but sometimes it was because I could no longer recover the contents!
In the past this has never been an issue (recovery) with my any of my own personal photographic work - all is safely on negatives & reversal transparencies (35mm mostly). I never feared loosing this work because of media obsolescence (& I still don’t). Now that I’ve predominantly ‘gone digital’ I do fear such losses. Judging by both my own track record (as noted above) and that of other industries (such as the music recording industry) this is a real problem with some complex issues – and I’m going to have to both understand the issues and come to terms with how to deal with them - that’s if I am going to have any chance of preserving over-time my own ‘digital work’.

My (Current) Approach
Digital data tape (such as LTO or the older DLT format) is one of the media types I’m considering using – as an ‘archival format’ tape has lots going for it over CD-R or DVD-R. As an interim measure I am starting to use DVD-R (single layer only) - keeping the image in its original RAW (Nikon NEF) format, plus as a TIFF copy (as a non-proprietary ‘backup format’, in the future I may opt to use Adobe’s DNG as the ‘backup format’). Then at a later date I plan to move all the DVD-R archives onto high-capacity digital data tape (keeping two copies) - as I have my doubts about the shelf life of DVD-R media. The DVD-R media will be used as my ‘working’ copies.

In choosing this approach I have taken into consideration –

• As far as is practical stay away from formats that use any form of lossy-compression.
• As far as is practical stay away from formats that use proprietary encryption of meta- (non-pictorial) data.
• Use formats and equipment that conform to open or widely-used proprietary standards.
• Choose a modern and widely used media type as a hedge against physical media obsolescence.
• Choose a physical media type and equipment with a proven track record of reliability.
• Choose a physical media type with a known and acceptable shelf life (>20 years).


> Those papers deal with “industrial” information storage, which is
> a nightmare due to the sheer volume of data involved, regardless of
> the storage medium or format being used.

With regards to the “sheer volume of data” issue – be it a large “industrial” or just a home-sized collection it’s still a problem that has to be tackled, as pointed out by Antonio in his post. If this wasn’t the case I would have just migrated all my 5.25” floppy disk well before they became obsolete. At first I did keep an old 5.25” floppy drive at hand, just in case - but there are only so many spare hours in one’s life!

6:45 am - Friday, September 23, 2005

#23 pez

(continuation of my last post)

To summarise - the main issues/facts as I see them are –

1) By their very nature film-based photographic negatives and reversal transparencies have the required properties to be used as a ‘preservation format’ in-situ, ie no migration to an archival format is required.

2) Currently most digital-based photographic formats do not have the required properties to be used as a ‘preservation format’.

3) Currently all the available physical media and digital recording formats are dependent on continuing access to compatible playback equipment. ** Film-based photographic formats also have this requirement, ie the need to read (scan) the image.

4) Obsolescence of physical media will force a migration to new physical media and possibly a new digital recording format.

5) Obsolescence of a digital recording format will force a migration to new digital format and possibly also to new physical media.

6) Proposed standards like Universal Preservation Format (UPF) can help with the digital format obsolescence issue. ** See the MacCarn article referenced in my previous post.

7) Proposed standards like Universal Preservation Format (UPF) won’t help with the physical media obsolescence issue.

8) ‘Emulation’ techniques can help with the digital format obsolescence issue, and could minimise the impact of physical media obsolescence. ** ‘Emulation’ techniques are widely used in other home-enthusiast activities where obsolescence or ‘hard-to-come-by’ is an issue - eg for classic game consoles & older computer equipment. ‘Emulation’ techniques are being considered by the television industry (Granger, S; 2000).

9) Continuing use of lossy-compression techniques (proprietary or open) in digital photographic formats complicates matters further - not only does it compromise the integrity of the original content, but it can also cause issues when transferring content to new formats (Liroff, D; 2001).

10) Proprietary encryption of meta- (non-pictorial) data within some formats is a disturbing trend, similar issue as to lossy-compression.

11) Adoption of an OpenRAW format (http://www.openraw.org/) is a way forward, and could become a valuable tool as a ‘preservation format’.


Cited References -

Granger, S; 2000. Emulation as a Digital Preservation Strategy, D-Lib Magazine
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october00/granger/10granger.html

Liroff, D; 2001. Media Asset Management - The Long-Term View. Speech presented at the Sun Microsystems Digital Media Universe, Beverly Hills, Calif. USA, August 21.

6:52 am - Friday, September 23, 2005

#24 GARY POGODA

Very interesting. It is obvious that you have given this topic far more
consideration than I ever have; however, I was surprised you did not
consider external HD backup, as suggested by Phule in comment #6.

I totally concur with your consideration of avoiding lossy compression
schemes, and I assume that for similar reasons you would also avoid
converting your digital images to analog film for preservation.

8:36 am - Friday, September 23, 2005

#25 pez

Also of interest may be the following article by MAM-A (Mitsui) re the 'longevity' of their 'Archive Grade Gold' DVD-R blanks -- http://mam-a.com/Archive_gold_image.html

8:43 am - Friday, September 23, 2005

#26 GARY POGODA

Wow !!!. Things are looking up.

8:53 am - Friday, September 23, 2005

#27 GARY POGODA

So does this alter your current approach? It certainly does mine. At
$3 apiece, I can live with having to burn a handful of DVDs per year.
Your collection sounds like it would not be quite that easily managed.

7:57 pm - Friday, September 23, 2005

#28 pez

GARY POGODA wrote:
> I was surprised you did not
consider external HD backup

I did look at it - but it's really more of a backup/recovery proposition, not so much an archival solution. Certainly not a long term 'store and forget' option.

Re ‘Archive Grade Gold’ DVD-R blanks - GARY POGODA wrote:
> So does this alter your current approach?

It could. Mitsui 'Gold' is one of the brands professional archivist are currently using for CD-R archival work. I have seen it cited in a number of trade articles. It will be interesting to see if they also adopt Mitsui's 'Gold’ DVD-R. LTO-2 tape is also a technology currently being used - some archives it seems are hedging their bets and using both CD-R & LTO (IASA Bulletin #51, Dec-2004). For now LTO-2 is just to expensive for me to use, but that could change in one to two years when more of the equipment hits the second-hand market. By then archival quality DVD-R may also have proven itself.

1:55 am - Saturday, September 24, 2005

#29 GARY POGODA

I do not think I will wait for the proof. It has to be better than the CDs
and DVDs I am currently using for storage. I am not as worried about
obsolescence as I am about media failure. Any thoughts on the future
of solid-state storage for archival purposes?

7:02 am - Saturday, September 24, 2005

#30 GARY POGODA

FYI, a great article about "Molecular Memory" being the "permanent"
archival solution of the near future, by Scott Wilkinson, appears in the
October issue of Electronic Musician magazine. Here is a link where
you can get a FREE copy.

http://emusician.com/toc/

I have not yet purchased any Gold CDs/DVDs. I figure I still have a
few more years of life left in my backups, so no real rush until I have
used up my current supply.

8:04 pm - Thursday, October 13, 2005