[alt-photo] Re: Opinion on Conservation of negatives/plates needed.

[Paul Viapiano]

Erie...

Is it the cost of duping that they are against?

How would you personally feel about scanning the negs, so that you at least 
have a digital dupe, seeing that you will dispose of the originals anyway?

Paul


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "erie patsellis" <erie at shelbyvilledesign.com>
To: "The alternative photographic processes mailing list" 
<alt-photo-process-list at lists.altphotolist.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 12:31 PM
Subject: [alt-photo] Opinion on Conservation of negatives/plates needed.


>I posted this to the Betterlight mailing list and after thinking about it, 
>there's more than a few conservationists here as well. I'm looking for any 
>and all suggestions and ideas, short of my being independently wealthy and 
>footing the bill (I'm not, likely never will be...)
>
> Some Background:
> I was contacted by a third party to scan some 8x10 glass plates and 
> smaller negatives for a local historical society, and was given some 
> samples of the images. Apparently they have at least 1,000 or more to 
> print/digitize. (I will quite likely using a flatbed 
> scanner,unfortunately) The glass plates are stored poorly and need, at the 
> least, cleaning of the non emulsion side prior to scanning. So far no 
> issues and well within my comfort zone. (though the plates will be 
> returned in archival storage envelopes, instead of just stacked in a box 
> with bond paper interleaving)
>
> I open the box of 5x7 negatives and wouldn't you know it, that familiar 
> smell, nitrate based negatives in the early stages of decomp. They haven't 
> yellowed appreciably (yet) and my suggestion is that they dupe them and 
> dispose of them properly.
>
> Here's where things get sticky, I'm doing this at cost, literally and 
> their attitude is that they don't care about the archival aspect, they 
> just want 4x6 index prints of the negatives. As someone with more than a 
> passing interest in conservancy and history, this rubs me the wrong way on 
> a number of fronts:
>
>  * The sole purpose of their tax exempt status (as well as state and
>    local funding and donations) is to preserve the history of the area.
>
>  * While they may not care, making the decision for future
>    generations is tenuous logic, at best in my view. Essentially,
>    they would be getting the work done for free, only the cost of
>    materials and one would think that as a not for profit they would
>    appreciate the willingness for somebody to offer some assistance.
>
>  * The images in question range (from what I could see) early 20th
>    century to circa/post WWII and vary from historical buildings
>    (many of which either don't exist or have changed greatly) to 
> nearly iconic images of the "war at home" aspects of life and have
>    great historical significance, especially considering the
>    predominantly rural area we are in and the lack of significant
>    historical resources generally available.
>
>
> We will be having a meeting with them again, within a week, but any 
> suggestions as to a course of action? In my mind, duplication of all 
> nitrate based images and proper disposal is paramount and primary to me, 
> both from the issue of the nitric acid out gassing risking the entire 
> collection of ephemera as well as all photographic images, to the more 
> important safety aspect.
>
> Suggestions are welcome, and if there is somebody in the area (central IL) 
> that can offer an assessment or recommendations , I'd be interested to 
> hear from them.
>
>
> erie patsellis
> _______________________________________________
> Alt-photo-process-list | http://altphotolist.org/listinfo