Power and Authority in Film Preservation

In Chapter 8 of her book Film Preservation: Competing Definitions of Value, Use, and Practice, Karen Gracy discusses four major elements that guide preservation practices within film preservation:

1. Evaluation of the condition of objects in a film archive

2. Collaborating/Co-existing with the laboratory that is digitizing your film

3. Selecting specific films for preservation

4. Establishing a national agenda for preservation

The first section on film inspection gave a good overall look at how an actual film repository handles that preservation aspect. It was interesting to note that although this particular archive used FIAF's standards as a starting point, they also had to incorporate their own standards that were practical given their real world limitations. It was a healthy reminder that "best practices" are generally written for "best possible conditions." Unfortunately in the real world there are concessions that have to be made regarding money, expertise, manpower and time. 

The second section was on the archivist and the laboratory. I didn't realize that most archives use a separate lab for the digitization process (although it was later noted in the chapter that this is slowly changing due to a decrease of up and coming experts in the field) it was interesting to note that the two are indeed establishing a very important relationship. The part I found the most intriguing was when the author quoted "Carl" from the studied archive as saying 'Do not let them control you....Eventually, if an archivist develops a long-term relationship with a laboratory, he or she along with the lab begins to have a "distinct look"'  (pg. 181). The author did in fact note the importance of the role of "observer" that the archivist plays, but just the same I found it fascinating that one could be so skilled in the field that they would be able to discern which films came from which lab and even who was in charge when that film was digitized.  I also thought "Tom's" comment that, "We have to introduce young people into this hybrid industry, now. It's a hybrid industry: it's both chemical and it's digital. You can't dismiss either one," was very poignant. It is disconcerting to think of how rapidly the number of qualified preservationists and specialists is declining with the onslaught of new technologies.  

In the section on the politics of selection I was happy to note that user demand plays a key role in objects becoming a priority for digitization. At my current corporate library the requests of the users was the biggest factor in collection development, which I think was vital in creating repeat patrons and helping employees get their jobs done to the best of their abilities. I didn't realize that committees were sometimes appointed to assist with the selection process when large scale grants are awarded to certain institutions. I can only imagine the nightmare of butting heads between a seasoned archivist and someone outside the field. I thought "Kent" made a good point that it may be excessive to have a committee when the collection itself was already carefully selected, so all the material is relevant and the decisions can be made more quickly than one outside the profession may think. It was also interesting to get the perspective of "Jon" who was able to speak more positively on the fresh historical perspectives that the committee members were able to bring to the table so that collaboration could produce a better finished product. 

The final section on establishing national agendas for preservation was both enlightening yet not surprising information at the same time. It was interesting to learn about National Film Preservation Act in 1996. Although a good initiative it contained some holes regarding what defined an "orphan" film and what copyrighted material preservationists/archivists could seek funding to digitize. The film industry is obviously a capitol driven market and unfortunately some films (although they are significant in terms of American heritage) are not cash cows and therefore will not be digitized on the part of the film corporations. Although the problem is still being dealt with, the passage of the Preservation of Orphan Works Act is helping to redefine what constitutes and "orphan" film and in turn open the door for some important footage to be preserved digitally. 

Film Digital Collections

The University of Maryland Digital Collection:

I was not able to access any of the video footage on this website. The site indicated that only people with a university directory account can access the footage from off site. I looked over the directions for constituents to access the videos from off site, and it looks like a complete pain. I can imagine this probably is a huge road block for a lot of users and lowers the number of people using these resources. Looking over the metadata was interesting though. It was simple and easy to understand and I liked that there was an identifier listed in case you wanted to cite the video. I also liked that they kept the initial information seen by the user simple so as not to overwhelm the average user with superfluous information. I didn't find a lot of information about the digitization process itself, just some general information on digitization overall. The search feature seemed to be pretty good, and turned up lots of relevant results on a few broad keywords that I tried.

The Internet Movie Archive Collection:

I loved this site! I liked that there are subject headings at the top of the page to direct you to your area of interest. I watched Merrie Melodies, a Tale of Two Kitties and the quality was actually pretty good. The picture looked good and what I was really impressed with was the sound. The history of the organization provided is good, and the FAQ's page was fairly thorough and included a whole section on how they digitize their films. I liked the options on the advanced search feature and I also like that it was streaming video.

The Library of Congress American Memory Motion Pictures:

I was suprised by how clunky this website was. Actually I take that back, I'm not suprised because I've looked at enough LC stuff that I've seen a pattern of subpar quality user interfaces, but I'm still amazed given the prestige of their orgranization. On the page we were directed to, there were only 16 collections. Getting to the point where you actually finally got to see the film footage took as may as 8 clicks in some cases and it was incredibly frustrating. The search feature was okay... I watched two videos from the burlesque (variety stage) collection. The 1st video of a female perfomer getting ready was terrible. Her head was 1/4 cut off the entire video and it was very shaky. The other video was pretty good however (a burlesque/trapeze artist disrobing). It was a clear picture, pretty steady and a good pace. With this difference in quality it's hard to say if the problem was the film itself or the person in charge of digitizing it. It would have been nice to just watch if from the website itself, but the MPEG 4 opened fairly easily in my windows media player.