My updated archives rant

[Jim Roots]

I agree with you whole-heartily Bob but it is an argument that gets lost in the noise that we live in today.

Gary J.

Which is precisely why Bob and others like him need to keep saying it over and over again.

Inspirational, Bob. Thank you.

Jim

[David Pierce]

I wish we had more archivists participating here because I think if people understood more about the condition of films in the archives, much of this discussion would go away or at least cool down.

That's probably because they're attending the annual conference of the Association of Moving Image Archivists in Philadelphia. There's an article on the conference at http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_pa ... ntion.html

You'll find the conference agenda and other information at http://www.amiaconference.com/ .

The conference (and membership in the organization) is open to any interested person.

David Pierce

[Bor Enots]

Well, many of us could not afford to go the AMIA.

Concerning film preservation and this current discussion:

1) Copyright and donor restrictions influence access. We try to get donors to forfeit rights, and we do not let donors put the kind of limits on access that we allowed in the past but we still have to deal with the copyrights and restrictions that are in place.

2) Film preservation isn't making a cool video transfer. It is access but not preservation and we have to balance both. But we will never sacrifice preservation. We are getting more and more tools to be able to accomplish both tasks bigger, better and faster so things are looking up.

3) It is expensive! Not only actual photochemical film preservation but basic collection management (cans, storage, cataloging) is also a big deal.

4) I would not begin to suggest that everyone in the various film archives are looking to do the best thing for the film as opposed to self promotion and such.... but, the vast majority of those of us that do work in film archives do so because we love film and want to do right by it.

5) We need to make sure these films are readily available for generations to come and not just available now to put into our indivual DVD cabinets now. We are working hard on preserving more and more titles AND actively working on getting them onto the internet.... perhaps you should do the same with your collections?

I appreciate the passion we all have towards these films we love, and I think these discussions/rants ultimately are healthy. Just keep in mind who the good guys are and don't mindlessly slap a friend in the face.

Rob

[WaverBoy]

Hey, an archivist!

Welcome sir, and thanks for your insightful post. Thanks also for choosing that (apparently often unsung and unappreciated) occupation, so more of our cinematic heritage might be preserved through your efforts.

Now, the next thing I want to hear is that you've found and preserved all the missing Clara Bow films.

[drednm]

Ok so my contact at LOC says that when they make a DVD for a customer they also make "a set of video digital files" for their collection. So I guess this is filed awa with the 16MM and 35MM reels.

I'm still confused about the connection between LOC and AFI. My paperwork says that "for this order a 35MM silent B/W print (FEA) from the AFI Marion Davies Collection will be used."

So are AFI and LOC all one entity now?

[Rodney]

I'm still confused about the connection between LOC and AFI. My paperwork says that "for this order a 35MM silent B/W print (FEA) from the AFI Marion Davies Collection will be used."

So are AFI and LOC all one entity now?

Check Bob Birchard's post at the top of page 2 of this discussion.

[drednm]

Thanks Rodney.... I had missed that point entirely.

[Tintin]

I thank everyone for their many thoughtful replies to my rant! So the general answer is that it still isn't feasible, mainly because of the expense, but also because of copyright/donor's rights. I do still have a couple of questions, though:

1. How expensive is it to digitize (for streaming) an already-restored film? There are a lot of films that have already been restored, but have not been released. There is the question of the music score, then, and the rights issues.

2. The UCLA catalog lists lots of their films as existing on VHS copies for viewing at the archive, all of them "non-circulating". The cost of copying a VHS tape is very low, either to another VHS tape or to DVD. And they could circulate them through interlibrary loan - even specifying that they could only be viewed at the library where the request was made (i.e., it could not be taken home by the patron to be copied). I assume this is again "impossible" because of copyright issues and/or fear of copying? Why doesn't UCLA sell copies of these to make money?