Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (
More info?)
David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> writes:
> Phil Stripling <phil_stripling@cieux.zzn.com> writes:
>>SNIP<
> I've got working 5.25" drives, and professional data transfer services
> do too.
Three or four people do, and one of them always posts to point this
out. The people with the diskettes (and in coming generations, the CDs)
don't, though, and they'll just toss the diskettes since they can't read
it.
>SNIP<
> > Another issue is that nobody knows what's on a CD, so if your grandkids
> > stumble across one, they won't know it's your valued imagery -- same with a
> > DVD.
>
> One should label them, certainly. And perhaps the boxes they're
> stored in as well.
Yes, and that creates its own problems -- people are reporting that the
adhesives in the labels and the chemicals in the inks are wrecking CDs, and
the recommendation now appears to write in ink in the clear area in the
center of the CD. Not much room for a full reckoning of the contents, but
that's another story.
>
> > Many people who post here swear they'll keep up with changing technology
> > and convert all their data from CDs to DVDs to keep the images available. I
> > doubt it, but let's say you do manage to keep your files on a medium that's
> > current at your death. Who's going to do that for you for the next one or
> > two generations? Who's going to care?
>
> Probably nobody, but if so, then it doesn't matter.
Well, I'll disagree with that. Someone in this thread has posted about
'old' photos with "Jill and the Ghost," and his assumptions about who is
referred to. Identifying the persons may end up of less interest than the
car, the clothing, or the location. The town I live in has large,
wall-sized blow ups of photos from the teens and twenties of the last
century. Nobody has a clue who the people are, but there's quite a bit of
interest in what buildings still survive, the fact that "B" Street is dirt
in the photos, and so on. Just because we don't know now who Jill and the
Ghost are doesn't mean that the photos won't have an interest that
transcends the individual identies when it's one or two generations later.
>
> *I* have been working to carry forward photo images from my
> grandparents' and parents' generations, so it doesn't seem that
> inconceivable that somebody might continue to care after me.
You're saying 'photo images.' I take it these are prints and maybe
negatives. There likely will be interest, but one of the reasons is that
there is no intermediary required to view the 'photo images.' People pick
up the print and are immediately (or not -- they may not be interested)
drawn to the picture. No need to boot a computer, find an appropriate
access mechanism (CD or DVD or tape drive), launch applications, and so on.
>SNIP<
> Color prints from the 1960s are mostly gone, ditto negatives. The
> materials have deteriorated. I've had to deal with prints, negs, and
> slides that are badly faded in my work preserving family photos.
>
> Modern chromagenic materials aren't nearly as bad as the 1960s stuff,
> but you still shouldn't count on them for even 50 years in ordinary
> household storage. You *might* get that, but you might not.
You've gotten other answers on this, but I refer you to your own
photographs which you are working to carry forward.
Another thing to consider is that the old prints may be folded, torn,
stained, color-shifted or otherwise damages, but those people are still in
there in the frame smiling into the sun with those old black cars with
running boards. Analogue imagery survives, doesn't it? Fold a CD, spill
coffee on a 5 1/4-inch diskette -- the digital media don't quite hold up to
the wears and tears. The pink-cast prints from the 60s are still
recoverable with some scanning and Photoshopping, even in the hands of a
consumer. Recovering data from a broken DVD or coffee-soaked archive tape
may be beyond the capabillities of mere mortals, and without knowing what's
on the recorded medium, I fear the temptation is just to toss it.
I don't think this is an answer to the original question, though. Sure, you
can argue with my points, but answer the original question. That will be
the best refutation of my comments.
--
Phil Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
The Civilized Explorer | spam and read later. email from this URL
http
/www.cieux.com/ | http
/www.civex.com/ is read daily.
/www.pbase.com/konascott/image/30853013/large.jpg
Facebook
Twitter