RE: Digital Film backup
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Camden Hardy wrote:
Hmmm, I have some serious problems with the claims this company makes on their website. "Reliability of these [CD/DVD] disks has been questioned when looking at whether the data would be recoverable using devices other than the original authoring device." This is simply not true. CDs use the standardized ISO9660 filesystem format, and DVDs use the standardized UFS filesystem. Standardized. Every computer with an optical disc drive can read these formats. A correctly burned disc will have no problems being read by other CD/DVD devices. "Storage of images at a resolution high enough to equal the resolution of film is costly and prohibitive in terms of technology. The space required to store all of these hard drives or disks would be greater than that used to store the actual negatives." A 25-pack of archival CDs from Light Impressions is $41.99, which comes out There many other logical holes on this site, suffice it to say that they really haven't made a strong case for using 35mm film as an archival storage solution over digital. They say things like digital storage is "unsuited to a long-term archival function", yet they provide no further information: why is it not suitable for long-term storage? No data whatsoever to back up their argument. The entire website just seems to be one big FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) campaign to scare people into buying their services.
No doubt everything you say is true, Camden, but speaking as a relative lay person in the matter (and not really expecting to outlive digital technology, though I'd love to bury it), this thought does come to mind:
All else failing, a crude projector of light and lens could be rigged up to get an image from film (assuming in the benighted state envisioned we still have electricity) so some reading of the material could be made.
Having watched in the last dozen years as material after material becomes useless, or anyay obscured, somehow that analog approach seems more logical than it may deserve....
But now here's a really shameless question: It's so easy with a slip of the wrist or, as one fellow warns, a surge during a storm, to wipe out digital (although I realize your terabytes aren't hooked up to anything that could do that), is there some reason for not keeping whatever it is (data as well as images I assume) at least the most treasured in hard copy, say -- I think they're called phot-o-graphs, or like that, and text? (Not that I do, but I think I'd rather than some of these torments.)