[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arsclist Reels and Boxes
This might be a little late but I have a few cents to put in.
I'm not a believer in the hermetically sealed packaging approach
(inasmuch as that is possible) for any media formats because:
1) One can't avoid sealing environmental contaminents in the container
unless it is sealed in a clean room, which most of us don't have and
can't afford
2) The item sealed in the container would stew in its own juices, so
to speak
3) One couldn't easily check on the status of a stored item without
breaking the seal
4) The Library of Congress had a bad experience with lacquers sealed
into shield-packs (as I recall)
I have an anecdote that points up the failings of the 3M plastic tape
box:
Several years ago in the Rodgers & Hammerstein Archives of Recorded
Sound (at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts) we had
a flood that doused the 10" tape collection. The tapes in the plastic
boxes got wet because the water ran into them through the opening
which runs around the middle of the edges of the box. The tapes in
the cardboard boxes (both archival and regular) got less wet or not
wet at all because first, the paper absorbed the water, and second,
the clamshell design does not present an upward-facing opening through
which contaminants can enter (water and dirt, primarily).
Other failings of the plastic box:
1) They are impossible to handle in batches -- if you try to move many
at once you will find yourself in a Lucy and Ethel situation
2) They are hard to label
3) There's no room to insert the production notes that you can't put
on the outside of the box
In short, go with the archival boxes. I would use the acid-free ones
because, whether or not the acid has a bad effect on the tape, the
boxes themselves won't become brittle.
Mark Tolleson
The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
P.S. This is my opinion, not necessarily the opinion of the New York
Public Library
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: arsclist Reels and Boxes
Author: "Steve Green" <sgreen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> at Internet
Date: 02/23/2000 12:37 PM
Greetings all. This is my first posting to the ARSC List so I hope I'm doing
this right.
A few thoughts concerning Brenda's question regarding the use of plastic versus
metal reels, and also cardboard boxes.
I've been involved with two NEH funded audio preservation grants, one at the
University of North Carolina in the mid 90s and one more recently at the
University of Maine. In North Carolina, I believe we used metal reels and
plastic cases, and I think at the time these were obtained as a unit package
from 3M. My impression was that it was quite expensive to go that route. Of
course you end up with a nice solid package that theoretically will withstand
some adverse conditions such as being dropped or being near a fire. When I took
on the project in Maine, I opted to use plastic reels and also opted for
cardboard boxes as opposed to plastic cases for the tapes.
I have been wondering myself for quite some time about the use of the molded
plastic cases as opposed to simple white cardboard boxes. My rationale for
using the white boxes was prompted by the lower cost factor PLUS I have never
been convinced that using "acidic" cardboard boxes actually hastens the
deterioration of magnetic tape. It would be great to hear some input from
someone who understands tape chemistry about this. The way I see it, first, in
an archival setting each reel-- at least an archival preservation master-- is
handled so infrequently that I don't find wear and tear on the boxes to be a
real factor to worry about. Those handling tapes should be trained to handle
them with relative care. Second, in North Carolina considerable time was spent
trying to develop labelling techniques for the plastic cases. I don't have one
in front of me but I seem to recall that trying to figure out what kind of self
adhesive labels might actually stick to the plastic box for thirty years was one
of the challlenges. With cardboard boxes, a person could-- if desired-- write
directly on the box without worrying that a label will peel and fall off down
the road. Of course, laser labels can also be used easily enough, and in Maine,
we used a template created with a database program. Info for each tape was
printed on full sheet label stock from Avery, and a small amount at the bottom
was trimmed off so the 8.5" x 11" sheet would fit neatly on the 10.5" box back.
Spine labels were made similarly, except we used regular bond paper and glued
the labels on by hand. This was because the white cardboard boxes have a coated
paper front and spine and an uncoated back. I figured the self adhesive labels
from Avery would adhere pretty well to the uncoated box back, but I thought
self-adhesive labels might peel off the spine more easily than something glued
on. We didn't bother with archival glue for the spine labels-- it was just a
plain glue stick. I guess we'll see in a few years how well that holds up....
Back to my rationale for cardboard boxes. In North Carolina, I found handling
the plastic cases to be extremely difficult. Not only are they heavy, but they
are also very slippery, and because of the space age design, they tend to slide
around, and it seems to me, this may increase the risk of dropping if one is
carrying a stack. The plain white boxes on the other hand, stack neatly; they
are white which facilitates hand labelling if needed; and they are much lighter
and much less expensive. In an archival setting, as I've said, I think that
risks from accidental droppage are minimal. In a fire, however, there is no
advantage whatsoever, and tapes could be damaged from both heat and water. That
is the one area where the plastic cases would seem to provide much better
protection. While it is not recommended archival practice to include box lists
inside tape boxes, I've seen lots of instances where this is done in order to
keep contents documentation handy. Trying to place folded sheets inside the
moldeed plastic cases is very messy-- not that this is a legitimate argument,
just an observation...
This may be heretical coming from a card carrying archivist, but I have yet to
see any published reports that indicate that a box which is not technically
"acid-free" might hasten the demise of a tape inside it. The tape never comes
in direct contact with the box (but is there off gassing and just how harmful is
it?) It strikes me that vendors of archival materials may be taking advantage
of a new popular awareness of the value in preserving things and in archival
endeavors generally. Everything needs to "acid-free" and while generally the
concept is a good one, I wonder if people think through the applications for
which certain products are going to be used. I have tried-- and come to hate I
might add-- the tan metal reinforced tape boxes offered by places like Gaylord.
The metal reinforced edges may have seemed like a good idea to the person who
designed them, but in practice they simply make it so the box won't stand up on
edge well. The lids fall off when the board used happens to develop any
curvvature from absorbing humidity. Yes, they feel heavy duty and they have
that "archival" look, but I have found them not satisfactory-- just my two
cents. Do we not have examples of tapes stored in cardboard boxes for the
better part of fifty years? And is it not often the tape that seems to break
down (from internal chemistry problems) BEFORE the box does?
I would like to see someone comment on the preference of metal reels versus
plastic. The reel, whether plastic or metal, seems pretty benign and aside from
physical damage that might be caused by winding problems, I don't believe reels
themselves contribute to tape demise. I understand that plastic can warp, but
is that not also true of metal? In a fire, I guess the plastic reels could melt
but will the metal reels get really hot and damage the tape? Never mind about
this, because if the fire is that close and they turn the hoses on, I'm not sure
it matters what kind of box the tapes are in, unless it is asbestos....
Anyway, after this long winded comment, I would like to second Brenda's request
and hear others thoughts about the seemingly mundane topic of boxes and reels.
Overall, I was pleased with the outcome of the project in Maine where we used
white cardboard boxes and plastic reels. Incidentally, we did use inserts in
the boxes so the reel is supported on a metal hub...
Steve Green, Archivist
Western Folklife Center
501 Railroad Street
Elko, NV 89801
sgreen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Greetings all. This is my first posting to
the ARSC List so I hope I'm doing this right.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>A few thoughts concerning Brenda's question
regarding the use of plastic versus metal reels, and also cardboard
boxes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I've been involved with two NEH funded audio
preservation grants, one at the University of North Carolina in the mid 90s and
one more recently at the University of Maine. In North Carolina, I believe
we used metal reels and plastic cases, and I think at the time these were
obtained as a unit package from 3M. My impression was that it was quite
expensive to go that route. Of course you end up with a nice solid package
that theoretically will withstand some adverse conditions such as being dropped
or being near a fire. When I took on the project in Maine, I opted to use
plastic reels and also opted for cardboard boxes as opposed to plastic cases for
the tapes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have been wondering myself for quite some time
about the use of the molded plastic cases as opposed to simple white cardboard
boxes. My rationale for using the white boxes was prompted by the lower
cost factor PLUS I have never been convinced that using "acidic" cardboard boxes
actually hastens the deterioration of magnetic tape. It would be great to
hear some input from someone who understands tape chemistry about this.
The way I see it, first, in an archival setting each reel-- at least an
archival preservation master-- is handled so infrequently that I don't find wear
and tear on the boxes to be a real factor to worry about. Those handling
tapes should be trained to handle them with relative care. Second, in
North Carolina considerable time was spent trying to develop labelling
techniques for the plastic cases. I don't have one in front of me but I
seem to recall that trying to figure out what kind of self adhesive labels might
actually stick to the plastic box for thirty years was one of the
challenges. With cardboard boxes, a person could-- if desired--
write directly on the box without worrying that a label will peel and fall off
down the road. Of course, laser labels can also be used easily enough, and
in Maine, we used a template created with a database program. Info for
each tape was printed on full sheet label stock from Avery, and a small amount
at the bottom was trimmed off so the 8.5" x 11" sheet would fit neatly on the
10.5" box back. Spine labels were made similarly, except we used regular
bond paper and glued the labels on by hand. This was because the white
cardboard boxes have a coated paper front and spine and an uncoated back.
I figured the self adhesive labels from Avery would adhere pretty well to the
uncoated box back, but I thought self-adhesive labels might peel off the spine
more easily than something glued on. We didn't bother with archival glue
for the spine labels-- it was just a plain glue stick. I guess we'll
see in a few years how well that holds up....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Back to my rationale for cardboard boxes. In
North Carolina, I found handling the plastic cases to be extremely
difficult. Not only are they heavy, but they are also very slippery, and
because of the space age design, they tend to slide around, and it seems to me,
this may increase the risk of dropping if one is carrying a stack. The
plain white boxes on the other hand, stack neatly; they are white which
facilitates hand labelling if needed; and they are much lighter and much less
expensive. In an archival setting, as I've said, I think that risks from
accidental droppage are minimal. In a fire, however, there is no advantage
whatsoever, and tapes could be damaged from both heat and water. That is
the one area where the plastic cases would seem to provide much better
protection. While it is not recommended archival practice to include box
lists inside tape boxes, I've seen lots of instances where this is done in order
to keep contents documentation handy. Trying to place folded sheets inside
the molded plastic cases is very messy-- not that this is a legitimate
argument, just an observation...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This may be heretical coming from a card carrying
archivist, but I have yet to see any published reports that indicate that a box
which is not technically "acid-free" might hasten the demise of a tape inside
it. The tape never comes in direct contact with the box (but is there off
gassing and just how harmful is it?) </FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>It
strikes me that vendors of archival materials may be taking advantage of a new
popular awareness of the value in preserving things and in archival endeavors
generally. Everything needs to "acid-free" and while generally the concept
is a good one, I wonder if people think through the applications for which
certain products are going to be used. I have tried-- and come to
hate I might add-- the tan metal reinforced tape boxes offered by places
like Gaylord. The metal reinforced edges may have seemed like a good idea
to the person who designed them, but in practice they simply make it so the box
won't stand up on edge well. The lids fall off when the board used happens
to develop any curvature from absorbing humidity. Yes, they feel heavy
duty and they have that "archival" look, but I have found them not
satisfactory-- just my two cents. Do we not have examples of tapes
stored in cardboard boxes for the better part of fifty years? And is it
not often the tape that seems to break down (from internal chemistry problems)
BEFORE the box does?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would like to see someone comment on the
preference of metal reels versus plastic. <FONT face=Arial size=2>The
reel, whether plastic or metal, seems pretty benign and aside from physical
damage that might be caused by winding problems, I don't believe reels
themselves contribute to tape demise. </FONT>I understand that plastic can
warp, but is that not also true of metal? In a fire, I guess the plastic
reels could melt but will the metal reels get really hot and damage the
tape? Never mind about this, because if the fire is that close and they
turn the hoses on, I'm not sure it matters what kind of box the tapes are in,
unless it is asbestos....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Anyway, after this long winded comment, I would
like to second Brenda's request and hear others thoughts about the seemingly
mundane topic of boxes and reels. Overall, I was pleased with the outcome
of the project in Maine where we used white cardboard boxes and plastic
reels. Incidentally, we did use inserts in the boxes so the reel is
supported on a metal hub...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve Green, Archivist</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Western Folklife Center</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>501 Railroad Street</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Elko, NV 89801</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><A
href="mailto:sgreen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>sgreen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A></FONT></
DIV></BODY></HTML>