Family photos depict smiling faces: births, weddings, holidays, children’s birthday parties. People take pictures of the happy moments in their lives. Someone looking through our photo album would conclude that we had led a joyous, leisurely existence, free of tragedy. No one ever takes a photograph of something they want to forget.
-Sy Parrish, One Hour Photo (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265459/)
On this past trip to Vermont I carried two cameras – my Nikon N60 SLR with two zoom lenses, and Laura’s Nikon 2600 digital. I probably took more shots with the digital because I was more willing to experiment without the cost of film. For those special shots, I used the SLR, because I could frame the shot better, and because the resulting image would be of much better quality – at least, better quality than the digital cameras we currently own.
As digital quality and convenience increases, I’m sure that the world will eventually completely switch to digital, at least from a consumer standpoint. Film will go the way of the 8-track and vinyl LP. However, there are two problems with this trend. First, there is the problem of increased obsolescence. I have an ancient Singer Graflex, and two Nikon SLRs made in the 1950’s. These take as good (or better) pictures as (than) my current camera.
Now, digital camera capability increases dramatically each year. The Fujifilm camera I bought a few years ago takes 1.3 megapixel images. Today’s cameras usually take a minimum of 3 megapixel images, and even camera phones sport 1 megapixel or better images. I can see the makers of digital cameras just loving this – the desire to upgrade will be hard to resist. While these cameras are comparable or better than what most users would be snapping with a typical film camera, there will still be that upgrade desire, closely linked to the same desire to upgrade computers on a regular basis. So far, I’ve been able to resist that temptation, sticking with my original Fujifilm, while Laura has her little Nikon.
We know that photographic negatives, transparencies and prints last a long time. They are reliable forms of storing data. Recently the Royal Geographic Society reprinted Frank Hurley’s pictures from the 1913 Antarctic Exhibition – from his original glass negatives, nearly 100 years old. An example of how robust the storage medium was – remember these negatives had been in sub-zero conditions and transported across an ocean in a tiny lifeboat!
-Julian Jackson, "Digital Longevity: the lifespan of digital files" (http://www.dpconline.org/graphics/events/digitallongevity.html)
The second problem is with the media itself. First, there is the fragility of the media. The longevity of digital storage media has not been fully determined. The best method of preservation is to upgrade the files onto newer media on a regular basis. However, this is time-consuming, and data is sure to be lost. Secondly, there is problem is with compatibility. If the data is not upgraded on a regular basis, there is little likelihood that it will be compatible with future computer systems.
My brother, Houston, pointed out to me that now, as with the Hurley negatives, if we discover a box of old negatives, we can recover the images. However, unless they are printed out (and there are still questions about the longevity of current image printing technology), the raw images are left on media cards or system hard drives. There is a strong likelihood that the images will be disposed of along with the rest of the data. What will be lost is a photographic record of everyday family events – the documentation of a generation.
I’m sure my customers never think about it, but these snapshots are their little stand against the flow of time. The shutter’s clicked, the flash goes off, and they’ve stopped time, if just for the blink of an eye. And if these pictures have anything important to say to future generations, it’s this: I was here. I existed. I was young, I was happy, and someone cared enough about me in this world to take my picture.
-Sy Parrish, One Hour Photo (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0265459/)
References:
- Ken Rockell’s FutureTrash�: Digital Obsolescence – http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/obsolescence.htm
- Digital Obsolescence (http://www.usefilm.com/photo_forum/11/786256/)
- Obsolescence threatens digital preservation – New York Times, Milwaukee Journal Sentinal (http://www.jsonline.com/bym/tech/news/nov04/279522.asp)
- Digital Preservation Coalition (http://www.dpconline.org/graphics/index.html)
- Photographs from my collection – http://genealogy.taylordigitalarts.com
- Top – paternal grandfather, aunts and uncles
- Bottom – maternal grandparents