Re: filmscanners: Best digital archive medium for scans?

[Winsor Crosby <wincros@earthlink.net>]

>Hersch wrote:
>
>>He [Mark] wants 20 years. My 20-year-old slides and negatives have 
>>degraded enough that they need Ed's roc, and are generally not as 
>>'good as new.' I think the digital resource is more reliable, if 
>>proper care and storage, and regular renewal are carried out.
>
>It needs to be mentioned that not all 20-year-old film is equal (we 
>all know the principles, but we don't often encounter the examples 
>head-to-head). :-)
>
>If film is stored in a cool, dark, humidity-controled environment, 
>its lifetime is very good over a period of 100-years or 
>so--providing that the film base and chemicals were "archiveable" in 
>the first place (and not all were). Some of my mother's slides are 
>52 years old--only a few of them are degraded: some by obvious light 
>exposure, some by dust, a very few just faded (poor dyes or 
>development).
>
>But both Hersch and Maris are right. Film is stable, and so are 
>digital numbers; the problem being that *nothing* is really 
>permanent, so continuous and redundant archiving, at this point in 
>time, is the safest way to approach this problem.
>
>Best regards--LRA
>

It is not wide spread, but photographers have archived color images 
as black and white color separations for years.  The longevity of 
black and white film is pretty well established.
-- 
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California