Subject: Mass preservation of photographs
Several aspects of preserving large collections of negatives have been bouncing around in my head recently, and I'd be curious the opinions of others in evaluating the following possibilities. 1. While we've seen preservation projects for duplicating or otherwise preserving nitrate and diacetate negatives, IPI's research suggests that virtually all 20th century negatives (other than those on a polyester base) will need preservation. 2. Cold storage is an effective means to slow the rate of deterioration. 3. At SAA, I heard a paper on Archives II's photo storage. They were able to regulate the environment within their cold storage chamber that the materials did not need to be put in special cold storage enclosures. (As I understood it, they were able to get around this by ensuring that the materials never crossed the dew point. Keeping the room around 55F was part of that trick.) Hence, you're not spending lots of money on materials and labor housing the materials. 4. Instead of investing lots of money in duplicating a portion of the collection (the nitrate/diacetate, and often just a sampling of those negatives), spend that money on building a cold storage unit that could contain all the negatives (including the triacetate). Given some of the budgets I've seen for dupe projects--even those that are based on samples--and the figures for cold storage facilities I heard at SAA, seems like one could preserve the whole in cold storage for less than a fraction through duplication. Thoughts? Richard Pearce-Moses Documentary Collections Archivist/Automation Coordinator The Heard Museum 22 E. Monte Vista Phoenix AZ 85004 602-252-8840 Fax: 602-252-9757 *** Conservation DistList Instance 9:32 Distributed: Thursday, October 5, 1995 Message Id: cdl-9-32-003 ***Received on Wednesday, 4 October, 1995