One size fits all! (but how well?)

How many times have you seen this in an advertisement? It seems to be a popular marketing strategy, but how can one size really fit all as well as something that was designed to be a good fit based on need? Lets take a closer look at this concept in the context of preservation...


Digitization: a one size fits all panacea (?)

Digitization for preservation has many positive aspects, as we have discussed previously, and will likely continue to do so in future posts, but there are drawbacks that need to considered as well if we are to have a sustainable and usable solution. Consider these four different types of information in the context of preservation; an 8mm movie of the New York World's fair, a digital photograph, an historic photograph, and a film negative.


World's Fair 1934:



In New York in 1965 a promotional film was made to show what a day at the World's Fair would be like using then current technology (Kodachrome 35mm movie film). Fast forward to today. This film has now been digitized and preserved for future generations and provides a detailed look at a past event that we would otherwise not have. In this instance the solution for preservation has allowed for a seemingly total preservation of the information, and done so in a way that allows for more people to view the information remotely without the destruction of storage media. The only drawback that I can see is that the technology used to scan the original (part of the Prelinger archives) is now outdated and newer technology could have preserved more detail from the original, or provided a larger image for viewing. All things considered, I would still say that in this case we have a good example of the proper matching of the method of preservation and information to be preserved.

A film negative:




Here is an example of an older type of film with a nitrate base that presents a different problem for preservation than the other examples. The video shows how easily, and quickly, the base of the film burns, making this medium difficult to both preserve and access the information it contains. By selecting a preservation method that removes the danger of fire - another good example of making a good decision based on the information to be preserved and the method of it's preservation.


A.P. News digital photograph of the 9/11 events:

On September the 11th of 2001, both towers of the World Trade Center were struck by aircraft and destroyed. An Associated Press photographer created digital captures of these events using a digital camera and stored them in digital format on a computer (or more likely many computers). These images, having been created in digital format originally, require only the occasional update of their storage format in order to remain accessible for the foreseeable future. Again, this appears to be a very good match of preservation format to the type of information to be preserved.


A historic photographic print:

In the early 1900's a photographic movement called Pictorialism was very popular. In this style photographers manipulated their prints, used heavily textured papers, and worked to represent as wide of a tonal range as possible (meaning that they attempted to have as many subtle shades of grey between the white of the paper and solid black). Again, fast forward to today. Here we begin to detect a mismatch between the method of preservation and the information to be preserved. In today's technology there is no way to represent the feel, or look, of textured paper that presents the same experience as the original (Relph-Knight, 2006).


The experience of information

Information is not always completely self contained - as I have mentioned before, it may have contextual or tactile properties that are part of what the information is without actually being part of the information itself. Sound confusing? Well, let's take a quick look at this idea in a little more depth using the last example above, since I determined that it was not necessarily a good choice for digitization.

In this particular example, the photographer was working in a time when the paper choice was as important to the resultant art as many other factors (Peterson, 1997), the texture of the paper used becomes part of the information itself. By removing this aspect of the information via translation into a format the does not allow for tactile interaction we are editing what is preserved, and therefore the information is no longer preserved in it's entirety, but only in edited form. The action of editing has removed one of the senses used to experience the information, and therefore has altered the original experience (Perricone, 2007).

In the digital format we also run the risk of losing valuable visual information, because even if extraordinary care is taken in the scanning of this print to form the preserved form, the process of viewing will alter it's representation. Every person viewing the resulting image will not see exactly the tonal range of the original because every computer monitor is adjusted differently, and only with the most modern calibration equipment can the settings of one monitor be made to closely represent the results of another (Widman, 1999). Therefore, information that existed in the original print is not completely preserved in the format selected for preservation, even if that format is capable of retaining those subtleties.

Lastly, the format of the original information - a specific size print in this case - presented in a specific way - in a specific size and color mat - is not retained in the act of preservation, a further act of editing resulting in further change. This is especially important for large prints which exceed the size of a computer monitor. Size influences the way a photograph is viewed (Shore, 2007), and by altering the size presented information in relation to the original size we change the way this information is used - in this case interpreted.


works cited:

Peterson, C. (1997). After the photo-secession: American pictorial photography (1910-1955). W. W. Norton & Company : New York.

Perricone, C. (2007). The Place of Touch in the Arts. The Journal of aesthetic education, 41(1), 90-.

Relph-Knight, T. (2006). Colour perfect.(colour management of computers). Personal computer world

Shore, D. (2007). The nature of photographs. Phaidon : New York.

Widman, J. (1999). Digital photography and the workflow: output. Graphic arts monthly, 71(6), 26-.

In the News: Vinyl makes a comeback

Vinyl goes from Throwback to Comeback

Not everyone has the same preferences, and preferences change over time, so it is important when considering preservation to also consider that what is popular now may not be what is popular in the future. A good example of this is the recent upsurge in interest of vinyl records, which have experienced a %20/year growth rate over the last five years, due in part by the tactile and audio differences presented by vinyl records compared to other audio formats. According to one interviewee in the article, "no one cares about CDs anymore, but people will buy an album because it's huge artwork and it's limited pressing" (Perry, 2008).

Because of these sorts of characteristics, making decisions about what it to be preserved, and in what format, must be made carefully. Not all preservation methods retain every aspect of the original piece of information, and choosing the wrong format for the type of information to be preserved could negatively impact the value of the preserved information.


works cited:

Perry, J. (2008, June 2). Vinyl goes from throwback to comeback. The Boston Globe.

Preserving the originals

I though it would be a good idea to cover, in a little more detail, a concept that I presented in the post titled "Why preserve information (Does it go bad)?" - the value of preserving the original source of information. Once we have a digital copy of something, why do we really need to keep the original? I've heard this argument before, especially from those who do not work as some form of preservation either professional or personal and I think that it is important to discuss the value of an original in the context of preservation.

The 'original':

Going once again back to my handy dandy desk dictionary, the definition for the work original is as follows:

NOUN:

1archaic : the source or cause from which something arises; specifically : originator

2 a: that from which a copy, reproduction, or translation is made b: a work composed firsthand

(original, 2008)

What does this have to do with preservation? Well, in his article "The importance of preserving paper-based artifacts in a digital age", Robert Bee presents an interesting point of view - that the process of digitizing information, and choosing how to present it, we are making editorial decisions that fundamentally alter the information itself. He also stated that by abstracting the information itself from the form, we are removing a valuable part of that information, part of it's original context is lost, as is the assurance that no alterations have been made (Bee, 2008).


The Devil is in the Details:

As evidence of this loss, Bee presents the case of microfilm as support for his position, with the specific example of newspapers on microfilm. He pointed out that colors were lost, issues were missing in part or in total, and that these problems were only discovered after the originals were lost (Bee, 2008), therefore preventing any future access to those lost bits of information. Earlier in this blog I discussed how information does not exist in a vacuum - how it has contextually related information that enhances it's value by establishing relationships with other information. When information is preserved, should this information not also be preserved in order to fully preserve it's value? Is not preserving information in the most usable format the goal of preservation?

Changing Standards:

As technological advancements are made in the field of preservation, so too change the standards. Microfilm was the standard media for storage of printed materials such as newspapers and other periodicals in the past, but now the standard is digitization by way of scanning. Scanning expands our ability to preserve information greatly, and because of that the standards for preservation have changed to reflect the new abilities of this new format. For example, it is now part of the standard to be able to reproduce a copy from the electronic version that will faithfully reproduce the original visual quality (Wentzel, 2007), something that was no possible with previous preservation formats.

The Future:

As storage formats continue to change as new technology is created, new issues will likely be discovered as well, although not necessarily immediately as noted in the above example. Moore's law states that the number of transistors on a computer chip will double approximately every two years (Moore, 1965)*. This translates to a very rapid rate of technological development, implying that there is not much time to research every aspect of any given technology before a new technology replaces it.

* Interestingly enough, the only known original copy of this article was found recently in a personal archive of magazines - the collector felt that while most institutions were throwing out computer magazines at the time, these would one day be valuable! (BBC, 2005).

In the context of preservation, this means that as we make choices for preserving information we need to keep in mind that newer, and perhaps better, technology will arrive constantly, and with it new opportunities for preserving more of the context of information. Just as microfilm could not preserve colors while modern digital format can, it seems completely believable that a some point in the near future a new technology will come around that will further expand our ability to better preserve every aspect of any given piece of information, not just what we deem worthy of saving. And, given that, is it not prudent to try preserve the originals when we can for just such an occasion?

Suggested Further Reading:

Preserving the Illustrated Text

Findings and Recommendations of the Council on Library and Information Resources

Benchmark for Faithful Digital Reproductions of Monographs and Serials

works cited:

BBC. (2005). Moore's Law original issue found. Retrieved June 2, 2008 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolpda/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_4472000/4472549.stm.

Bee, R. (2008). The importance of preserving paper-based artifacts in a digital age. The library quarterly, 78(2), 179-.

Moore, G. (1965). Cramming more components onto integrated circuits. Electronics, (38)8.

original. (2008). In Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Retrieved June 2, 2008, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/original.

Wentzel, L. (2007). Scanning for digitization projects. Computers in libraries, 27(3), 6-.

Digital preservation - Media and format

Earlier I briefly discussed what it means to preserve information, why it is preserved, and by whom, and now I would like to revisit some of the points made in the first post regarding problems inherent in preservation in a little more detail - namely digital storage formats. Preserving information in the various digital formats available today offers many advantages over the preservation of the original physical information, such as access to more people in more locations (Gwinn, 1996), but it has some downsides as well. These downsides don't seem to be getting quite as much publicity as the upsides, and this has created a somewhat lopsided view of the format that could negatively impact those who rely on it or plan to rely on it in the future.

This is an 8" floppy disk - I still have one box of them left from sometime the 1980's. How many people reading this can remember using these (honestly)? How many even knew they existed? There is data preserved on this disk - not much, but some - yet I cannot access it because I have no 8" floppy drive, nor do I have an IBM system 34 to read the information even if I had the drive. The technology required to access the information preserved on this disk is obsolete and unavailable, therefore the information preserved on this media may as well not even exist - in essence it does not exist.

When the Library of Congress began to investigate the process of digital preservation it conducted a study to better understand what challenges would be involved in the process. They found that due to the progress of technology they were unable to determine how long the digitized information would continue to be accessible. They also found that it was imperative to preserve the original forms in the event of a loss of the digital versions, or for the future as newer technology became available for enhanced digitization (Marcum, 2007).

As technology progresses the ability to access information preserved on the media of older technology is still required to access that information, unless all of the information is moved to a more modern format before the technology required to access it has become unavailable. This continual updating of storage media translates into an ongoing real world cost for the preservation of digital information, which needs to be accounted for when considering what is involved in preserving digital information for the long term future.


Suggested Further Reading:

the Computer History timeline

A Brief History of Computing summary timeline


Works cited:

Feldman, S E. (1997). "It was here a minute ago!" Archiving the Net. Searcher, 5, 52-64.

Gwinn, N. E.. (1996). "Mapping the Intersection of Selection and Funding," Selecting Library and Archive Collections for Digital Reformatting: Proceedings from an RLG Symposium, Mountain View: The Research Libraries Group, Inc., p58.

Marcum, D B. (2007). Digitizing for access and preservation: strategies of the Library of Congress. First Monday, 12(7).

What does it really mean to preserve information?

According to my handy 1997 Merriam-Webster desktop edition dictionary, the word 'preserve' is defined as follows:

Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pre·served; pre·ser·ving
1 : to keep or save from injury, loss, or ruin : PROTECT
2 : MAINTAIN 1, continue

So, to preserve information would mean to save it, to prevent it from becoming inaccessible, or from being damaged or altered by maintaining at least its' original content, if not its' original form. But, how would this be accomplished, given information's multitudinous forms and formats?

In order to examine this question, perhaps it would be a good idea to look a little closer at the various formats in which information may be found these days. Information may be found in print format (books, periodicals, etc.), on film (or even glass plates!), and even in various completely electronic formats such as this blog (assuming that you did not print this out) to name but a few. Each of these formats comes with it's own set of special considerations when it comes to preservation, given our working definition above, and as such, each must be handled somewhat differently if we are to achieve our goal.

Lets take a cursory look at some of the pros and cons of each of these different formats, just to get an idea of what sorts of problems each of them might present to those who wish to preserve them.


Physical printed information:

Pros:

1. It requires no special equipment to access.
2. It's format never becomes inaccessible due to changes in technology.
   

Cons:

1. Printed information, being physical, takes up physical space.
2. It can generally only be accessed by one person at a time.
3. It often requires special storage considerations, which can add to the cost of it's preservation.
4. Physical deterioration will eventually cause it's destruction.
   

Physical visual information:

Pros:

1. It may or may not require special equipment to access.
2. Some forms will not become inaccessible due to changes in technology.

Cons:

1. Takes up physical space.
2. It can often only be accessed by one person at a time.
3. It often requires special storage considerations, which can add to the cost of it's preservation.
4. Some forms will become inaccessible due to changes in technology.
5. Physical deterioration will eventually cause it's destruction.

Electronic information:

Pros:

1. May be access by multiple people at once.
2. May be accessed from multiple remote locations.

Cons:

1. It requires special equipment to access.
2. All formats will become obsolete over time.
3. Storage costs include the maintenance of expensive equipment that requires specially train technical staff.
4. Failures of storage media may result in total loss of data, requiring duplication of storage (and thus storage costs).

Suggested Further Reading:

Library of Congress Preservation

The Image Permanence Institutes's The Archival Advisor


Works Referenced:

Chapman, S. Counting the Costs of Digital Preservation:
Is Repository Storage Affordable?. Retrieved May 14, 2008 from http://jodi.tamu.edu/Articles/v04/i02/Chapman/chapman-final.pdf.

Hanna, J. & Burge, D. Saving Digital Storage Media. Retrieved May 14, 2008 from http://www.archivaladvisor.org/shtml/art_savdigmedia.shtml.

Kingma, B. (1999). The Economics of Digital Access:
The Early Canadiana Online Project. Retrieved May 14, 2008 from http://www.si.umich.edu/PEAK-2000/kingma.pdf.