Last year I wanted to OCR (optical character read) city directories from a
nameless State Library into a database I'm creating.  They told me that
after they microfilmed them the company dumped the hard copies.  I suppose
they never thought that OCR technology would come down - cost wise - to the
end user.

Hmm, what is the old saying about putting all your eggs in one basket?

dr

> From: "Joseph A. Cutshall-King" <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: "A LISTSERV list for discussions pertaining to New York State
> history." <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:50:13 -0400
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New York Press and "newsmen's race"
>
> I absolutely agree. Any newspapers I've had microfilmed in the Washington
> County
> Historian's office have been saved, understanding that better technologies may
> come along to better reproduce. Scanning will be, ultimately, such a
> technology,
> in spite of the pooh-pooh-ing of those who dismiss the technolgy as too
> fragile,
> etc. Coming from a museum background before I became a municipal historian, my
> training was that we saved everything we could. It's anathema to me to see
> papers
> copied and dumped because they are "crackling away," or "too brittle to last."
>
> Regarding that last issue, Nicholson  Baker's article "Deadline" in the July
> 24,
> 2000 issue of The New Yorker magazine is a must read for anyone who places
> total
> faith in the permanence of film. It shatters that concept. I've worked with
> film
> collections since 1975 and I have seen nothing to suggest that any microfilm
> can
> last the length of time they are suggesting. Moreover the initial quality
> leaves
> so much to be desired, I can't imagine heaving the whole lot of a local paper
> on
> someone's say so that a microfilm master copy will be all that is needed for a
> few thousand years. It flies in the face of preservation, the laws of physics,
> andof  museum conservation training to place that kind of faith in a single
> medium of storage, especially that stores not the original but a captured
> image.
>
> I've felt this before I read Baker's article and I feel more strongly about it
> now. There needs to be open discussion and free questioning in the scientific
> community dealing with preservation and conservation on this matter.
>
> A local newspaper in our region nearly ended up in the dump because of such
> philosophy. It's been preserved, though heaven only knows where it will end up
> without money. I am at loss as to understand how we can have absolute faith in
> the prospect of a medium that has only been around for less than two
> centuries,
> and itself so fragile, being the saving element in our printed history. It
> also
> seems to be contradictory when one considers the notion that newspapers are
> being
> thought of too fragile to last, hence the "film them now before it too late
> theory." Is film's substance that much more durable? I need more proof. A sad
> point about newspapers are the tons of them being resurrected from landfills
> and
> barely showing any signs of disintegration after decades and decades of being
> expected to rot away.
>
> Will this issue be discussed openly?
>
> [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
>> Is any effort being made to preserve or archive the original newspapers (many
>> printed on crumbling, acid paper)?  Despite the fragility and crumbling
>> nature of these yellowed originals, they nevertheless contain photographs and
>> illustrations that reproduce terribly on microfilm.  Many of these printed
>> newspaper photographs, despite their screened format and grain, are the only
>> "originals" we'll ever have.  These crumbling papers should just be put away
>> somewhere and saved anyway.  Future technology may make it possible to make
>> further use of them.  I fear that libraries may be all too eager to destroy
>> originals once they are microfilmed.
>
> --
> ________________________________
> Joseph A. Cutshall-King
> Grant Writing/Fund Raising Services
> Affiliate of Charles R. Putney, Development Services for Nonprofits;
> Bennington, VT
>
> PO Box 154
> 693 County Route 49
> Cossayuna, NY 12823
>
> Tel.: 518-692-9505
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>