archiving, digital vs. film

Started Oct 3, 2003 | Discussions thread
daishi Regular Member • Posts: 271
yes

film is currently the only viable long term storage format for photographs. Most people seem to be thinking on a short term basis when thinking about digital archiving. 70 years down the road who knows if any current media or digital image format will be readable, but negatives certainly will. Also the level of technology required to make a print from a negative is relatively low, an enlarger is a relatively simple device and paper emulsion can be made by hand if need be using a relatively simple process. The amount of technology and infrastructure to be able to read a simple CD is immense. If the world ever reverts to a pre 20th century technological level photographs stored in negative form will still be readable

For true archival purposes, film is the only way to go at the moment. Alternatively platinum or palladium prints can be used, which should out last even film (I think I've heard 500 years of life for either format)

There was an article on photo.net about a photography who used a professional kodak DCS camera and he is no longer able to read many of his images because kodak no longer provides support for the image format

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow