I suspect we are losing much of our history - there is a prevention

[rpcrowe]

I do a lot of genealogy work and as such, I have collected quite a few black and white images of my ancestors and related persons. Many of these are well over a hundred years old and, surprisingly are in very good shape. Granted, most of these images were done by professional photographers because in those days, people did not have the capability to make their own photographs.

However, I also have a collection of B&W prints which were shot 70-90 years ago using personal cameras of the time (most likely Box Brownie or folding Kodak type). Although the image quality attained from these old cameras is not great - the B&W prints are surviving pretty well. This image of my dad was shot between 1928 and 1930, which makes it approximately 90-years old I can identify the approximate date this image was shot because I know the dates he served in the Navy.



OTOH: My wife is doing a photo book to commemorate her daughter's 50th birthday and has been working with color prints shot with various consumer equipment of the time - such as Instamatics and throw away cameras... Unfortunately, not only was the image quality absolutely terrible to start off with (resulting from the poor capability of the photographer as much as to the poor quality of the equipment used) but, more importantly the prints (40-50 years old) are universally faded and muddy. It's not only snapshots that have deteriorated - many "professional" images are fading away also. Prints are not the only endangered media. Slides (more so Ektachrome type film, rather than Kodachrome) are also fading away. Many collections of old photos are kept in albums or shoe boxes, certainly not the optimum storage conditions.

Scanning and using an editing program can "save" these old memories for future generations. It's a big job but, I think that the saving of family history is important enough to make it worthwhile. Luckily many people have multipurpose machines (fax - printer - scanner) that can do the job. Although this type of scanning will not produce ultimate quality - it will serve to halt the ravages of time which is destroying the evidence of our family histories...

Phone photography is another area in which the images are endangered. Not because the image is of poor quality (phones of today do a pretty darn good job) but because many people do not transfer the phone images to another storage device. The images exist for a while on the phone and are then sent away to limbo - with no permanent storage...

[Manfred M]

The downside of your approach is "digital rot", something of concern to archivists all over the world. Digitizing the work is fine so long as the technology exists to reproduce it; video disks, video tape, have been obsolete for years. There might be a few video disk players around, but neither Beta, VHS or other tape formats have been built in years.

Once the current standards; JPEG, etc. and related hardware are obsolete, just try to get at the data; floppy disks, ATA hard drives, etc. are no longer supported in hardware, and depending on your computer, neither are optical disks.

The absolute best way of archiving images is to print them using modern, pigment based archival inks on archival papers and storing them in an acid-free container. Life of these can be into the hundreds of years, based on test results from outfits like Aardenburg Imaging:

https://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ or

Wilhelm Imaging Research:

http://wilhelm-research.com/

[DanK]

My wife is doing a photo book to commemorate her daughter's 50th birthday and has been working with color prints shot with various consumer equipment of the time - such as Instamatics and throw away cameras... Unfortunately, not only was the image quality absolutely terrible to start off with (resulting from the poor capability of the photographer as much as to the poor quality of the equipment used) but, more importantly the prints (40-50 years old) are universally faded and muddy.

Indeed. I had to put together slide shows for my kids' weddings, and even the color prints that had been protected from sunlight were mostly in awful shape. In contrast, I have black and white photographs going back a century or so that are in tolerably good condition.

The obsolescence of digital media is a real problem but is of a different sort. When old color photographs deteriorated, the data were lost or distorted. When a storage medium becomes obsolete the data aren't damaged; they just become hard to access. Of course, this problem can be avoided if you move the files to a newer medium. The problem arises if you aren't there to do it, e.g., if a grandchild digs it out of a box (as I have done with previous generations' photos). I think it will be a long time before most of those media become truly unrecoverable. For example, no one has used 3.5 inch floppies for many years, but you can buy a plug-in USB 3.5" disk drive (new) for less than $15.

Digital rot is different from this obsolescence and is analogous to fading colors: it's the lost of data from degradation of the storage medium. This was a big problem with tape, whether digital or analog, because the magnetization of the particles bleeds through to adjacent layers and also deteriorates over time. But it can happen to nonmagnetic media as well, such as optical media.

I have never seen any comparison of the rate of decay of optical media compared with paper prints, but I think the former could be worse if and when it happens because the loss of certain bits could make the file unreadable, if I understand correctly.

For that matter, I have never seen comparisons of most of these media. The degradation of magnetic tape doesn't take long, and I have experienced it first-hand.

[Wilfred]

Thank you very much for such information! Now I will look for site updates!

[Geoff F]

I am in the process of scanning around 3,000 medium format black & white negatives from 50 years ago and they are starting to break down. Most are saveable with a little bit of touching up work but some are too degraded to produce worthwhile results. They are for the local history society but any form of future storage is open to doubt.

Formats like Jpeg, Tiff, Psd, etc should be around for many years to come because so much material has been stored using them; although it might eventually require a bit of specialist equipment to access the files. DVD discs, hard drives, etc are an unknown quantity when it comes to long term storage. Prints, using the best materials, are estimated to last for over 100 years when correctly stored; but nobody can be certain so multiple storage methods are advisable.

But one word of warning. Cloud storage sounds a good idea but make sure that a number of people have access to the facility. There have been many cases where the sole 'owner' of the data has died and the storage provider has refused permission for their next of kin to access the files without a court order. Being granted right of probate hasn't been considered sufficient. So when payment ceases the material can be destroyed. It is a crazy world, isn't it.

[Manfred M]

Good points Geoff. The other issue with Cloud Storage is that online providers come and go.

I had some image stored with a company called "Kodak". When they entered bankruptcy protection people using their service were given very little notice to recover their images before the site was taken down. CiC members went through something similar when TinyPic shut down in 2019. All kinds of horror stories here....

[Cantab]

o

I am in the process of scanning around 3,000 medium format black & white negatives from 50 years ago and they are starting to break down. Most are saveable with a little bit of touching up work but some are too degraded to produce worthwhile results. They are for the local history society but any form of future storage is open to doubt.

Formats like Jpeg, Tiff, Psd, etc should be around for many years to come because so much material has been stored using them; although it might eventually require a bit of specialist equipment to access the files. DVD discs, hard drives, etc are an unknown quantity when it comes to long term storage. Prints, using the best materials, are estimated to last for over 100 years when correctly stored; but nobody can be certain so multiple storage methods are advisable.

But one word of warning. Cloud storage sounds a good idea but make sure that a number of people have access to the facility. There have been many cases where the sole 'owner' of the data has died and the storage provider has refused permission for their next of kin to access the files without a court order. Being granted right of probate hasn't been considered sufficient. So when payment ceases the material can be destroyed. It is a crazy world, isn't it.

Geoff, what type of scanner are you using? I had a look at photo/negative scanners a year or so ago and didn't pursue the matter but I may revisit the issue this year. My recollection is that Manfred uses an Epson scanner but I may be wrong.

[Manfred M]

o

Geoff, what type of scanner are you using? I had a look at photo/negative scanners a year or so ago and didn't pursue the matter but I may revisit the issue this year. My recollection is that Manfred uses an Epson scanner but I may be wrong.

That would probably be my choice if I scanned today, but have not done any in years. I own a Konica-Minolta Dimage slide and negative scanner, that is no longer supported. Slow, but did a very good job. I am looking at getting back into film later on this year and will be investigating the Epson V800 and V850.

[loosecanon]

I have 40 year old prints on cibachrome materialthat look as good as new. Only danger is that a drop of water will cause serious water marks, so protect with glass.
For slides I copy with a camera, key is high quality light source with diffuse coverage and over 95% CRI. For scanning I find my Canon 9000F II does a very good job, but is not quick for high quality scans. Its worth duplicating the slide and film holders to speed production.

[shreds]

I foresee that in future, relatives will have no idea what is on numerous hard drives used for photographic backup let alone be intrigued enough to find appropriate software to access the devices if the format has changed. (Notice how Apple have moved to MPEG developed HEIC format rather than jpeg, unless you make provision for conversion when downloading).

Scanning and copying solutions at high end has reduced since Nikon stepped back from producing decent quality scanners (the prices of second hand ones meant you could at one point buy, scan and sell and even on occasion make a profit as the prices escalated.

The ‘blad disc scanners proving very expensive except to professionals who could make a living out of high end scanning for themselves and others.

Archival reproduction of negatives and prints has been seized as an opportunity by hi-end Scandinavian firm Phase One, who have produced and marketed cameras specifically at this market, although their prices are eye watering too.

Maybe the future of photographic recording and archival having hit the biggest mass market possible, will fall victim to the few who can afford to do this as it was in the 1800s and early 1900s.

Getty, Alamy and major photo libraries will be our descendants view of the twentieth and twenty first century, unless of course they fall victim to commercial pressures too. Already as said some less well funded online providers have gone to the bin and have taken much of their material taken by others, with them.

I have always expounded the view that you take photos for your own enjoyment (or commercially to the requirements of your clients). Other may take a different view and cannot be predicted or truly planned for in their entirety.

So enjoy what you do. Worrying about an unpredictable future really is wasted time. Pick up your camera and perfect your craft. This in itself can give others, at this time, enjoyment and pleasure.

[Geoff F]

That would probably be my choice if I scanned today, but have not done any in years. I own a Konica-Minolta Dimage slide and negative scanner, that is no longer supported. Slow, but did a very good job. I am looking at getting back into film later on this year and will be investigating the Epson V800 and V850.

I use the Epson V800 and it does a good job. The auto ICE enhancement is surprisingly good for auto software of this type but it is slow.

Tried doing some 45 year old colour medium format negatives but the colour seems to be degrading worse than monochrome and the scans have needed quite a bit of colour balancing work. Not sure at the moment if that is a time problem or if the colour was a bit odd at the time of production. There were quite a few differences between different makers of colour film.