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] >