David S. Ferriero, 'Losing Our Memory'. Access at: http://www.archives.gov/about/speeches/2010/3-22-2010.html
There is a fear among many that records and archives are putting their material in danger by entrusting it to electronic storage. The process is underway extensively and there are of course considerable advantages. Digitization can: increase accessibility for users, this may include better search ability within the system. It can also better preservation and avoid damage being caused to original documents. Most obviously however, it significantly decreases the spatial requirements by creating instead, a primarily digital space.
The limitations that are recognised include the rapidly changing technologies both in hardware and in software. This is coupled with unreliable systems of ensuring to keep up with software developments. In some cases, as highlighted in the British Museum archive, the amount of work required to make digital copies of everything in the archive is too overwhelming a task and archives may lack the resources to do this. Such a change over is costly in time, labour and money.
There is a fear among many that records and archives are putting their material in danger by entrusting it to electronic storage. The process is underway extensively and there are of course considerable advantages. Digitization can: increase accessibility for users, this may include better search ability within the system. It can also better preservation and avoid damage being caused to original documents. Most obviously however, it significantly decreases the spatial requirements by creating instead, a primarily digital space.
The limitations that are recognised include the rapidly changing technologies both in hardware and in software. This is coupled with unreliable systems of ensuring to keep up with software developments. In some cases, as highlighted in the British Museum archive, the amount of work required to make digital copies of everything in the archive is too overwhelming a task and archives may lack the resources to do this. Such a change over is costly in time, labour and money.
David Bearman in Wired magazine, 04.09.01
David S. Ferriero, the archivist of the United States by appointment of the President speaks of the ever diminishing durability of technologies and the abundance of obsolete technologies. He points out the resilience of clay tablets and medieval manuscripts as compared to the unreliable floppy disk or 8 track tape.
David S. Ferriero, the archivist of the United States by appointment of the President speaks of the ever diminishing durability of technologies and the abundance of obsolete technologies. He points out the resilience of clay tablets and medieval manuscripts as compared to the unreliable floppy disk or 8 track tape.
David S. Ferriero, ‘Losing Our Memory’, March 22, 2010
Ferriero goes on to track such movements as that away from paper documentation in the archive to the use of microfilm – a medium that required significantly less space and could last for about 500 years in the appropriate storage conditions. However, more recent changes have only endangered the longevity of archive material. In a quote from Alexander Stille it is noted that “most colour photographs become unusable within 30-40 years, videotapes deteriorate much more quickly then does traditional movie film”[1] to name a few examples.
Such dangers have been realised. The US census bureau became unable to read the data from tapes recording the 1960 census. Had data not been transferred to up to date tapes the information would have been lost. In fact in ‘Myths and Realities About the 1960 Census’ (Adams and Brown) it is claimed that 1,575 records “could not be copied because of deterioration”[2].
Another gap that is being created is due to a failure to archive Email correspondence. This has raised concerns among many that not only would history be lost but governments would avoid thorough transparency.
Ferriero goes on to track such movements as that away from paper documentation in the archive to the use of microfilm – a medium that required significantly less space and could last for about 500 years in the appropriate storage conditions. However, more recent changes have only endangered the longevity of archive material. In a quote from Alexander Stille it is noted that “most colour photographs become unusable within 30-40 years, videotapes deteriorate much more quickly then does traditional movie film”[1] to name a few examples.
Such dangers have been realised. The US census bureau became unable to read the data from tapes recording the 1960 census. Had data not been transferred to up to date tapes the information would have been lost. In fact in ‘Myths and Realities About the 1960 Census’ (Adams and Brown) it is claimed that 1,575 records “could not be copied because of deterioration”[2].
Another gap that is being created is due to a failure to archive Email correspondence. This has raised concerns among many that not only would history be lost but governments would avoid thorough transparency.
Wired Magazine, September, 2001
It became clear that many of the institutions we corresponded with did not have a consistent system of archiving email material. There is a lack of reliability in relying on individuals to print out important emails for the physical archive and there is no system in place to store these emails digitally in a reliable and regularly updated form.
As it stands there seems to be dangers in relying to heavily on the digital, however it is transition that would improve the accessibility of documents that currently gathering dust in the physical archive space and prevent such information from becoming too static. In our experience with interacting in these archives, the extent to which digitisation has become a part of the archive has much to do with the incentives of particular archivists and will likely remain so in many cases.
[1] Alexander Stille, The Future of the Past, 2003
[2] Margaret O. Adams and Thomas E. Brown, "Myths and Realities about the 1960 Census," Prologue: Quarterly of the National Archives and Records Administration 32, no. 4 (Winter 2000)
It became clear that many of the institutions we corresponded with did not have a consistent system of archiving email material. There is a lack of reliability in relying on individuals to print out important emails for the physical archive and there is no system in place to store these emails digitally in a reliable and regularly updated form.
As it stands there seems to be dangers in relying to heavily on the digital, however it is transition that would improve the accessibility of documents that currently gathering dust in the physical archive space and prevent such information from becoming too static. In our experience with interacting in these archives, the extent to which digitisation has become a part of the archive has much to do with the incentives of particular archivists and will likely remain so in many cases.
[1] Alexander Stille, The Future of the Past, 2003
[2] Margaret O. Adams and Thomas E. Brown, "Myths and Realities about the 1960 Census," Prologue: Quarterly of the National Archives and Records Administration 32, no. 4 (Winter 2000)