Article

What Makes A Collection Unhidden?

It’s very easy to make a collection hidden. Much too easy. If you can ingest a collection, you can hide it. In fact, that’s probably what you do. We don’t even have to delve into backlogs (I mean yes, we must, but here, conceptually, we needn’t just now); being hidden is the default status of an acquisition.

This fact (okay, and the backlogs) is just one reason why the CLIR-funded Hidden Collections projects and similar efforts are so very important. An archive starts in the hole. It helps for someone to toss down a flare and a ham sandwich every so often. Or cheese. Or hummus on a gluten-free wrap.

Because I’ve been thinking about processing audiovisual collections a lot lately, and because I have nothing better to do with my time besides deconstruct the meaning of single words (though I do also enjoy decoupage and carving stamps out of potatoes) I’ve been contemplating just what it is that makes a collection unhidden.

Essentially, I would say that an unhidden collection is one that is able to be discovered and subsequently accessed by users, preferably in a way that decreases the mediation of the archivist. Discovery means the creation of some record of the material that can be searched or browsed, whether a finding aid, publicly accessible catalog, or other mechanism. Access means the ability to call up the material (or facsimile thereof) in person or (if available) online, and, for lack of single encapsulating sensory term, consume it (i.e., read, listen, watch, smell, etc.)

— — — — — —

In 9th grade I began collecting pennies in the lefthand pocket of my Green Bay Packers Starters jacket. By 10th grade I had several dollars worth that I lugged around with me everywhere, always very careful about how I removed my jacket and how I hung it or set it down. It seemed worth it for the one or two times someone was short a few cents and I could “humorously” pull out a handful of pennies to help. It was really worth it the one time I needed 50 cents to get a Dr. Pepper from a vending machine and had to trade someone for quarters. Harpo Marxx aspirations aside, there was a cost and a weight to carrying these un-utilized assets.

— — — — — —

This all makes sense.

Well, not the pennies.

Except.

Except.

Except that not all materials in archives can be accessed — in person, online, or otherwise. I’m not just talking condition here, but the fact that a large portion of audiovisual materials are entirely inaccessible simply because there is no means of playback within the institution.

This, of course, impedes that idea of access. Frequently, due to the lack of annotations or other knowledge of the content, it even impedes the creation of a descriptive record that would enable potential access. In other words, the creation of a record for unknown audiovisual content promotes neither direct discovery nor access. The collection remains hidden until both aspects are fulfilled, which means that in many cases reformatting is a precursor to description as a precursor to becoming Unhidden.

(I really wish that the word were something stronger like Unbound, but unhound sounds like getting rid of a dog, and I don’t want to let go of my guy:)

In order to unhide audiovisual collections they need to be transferred to a state where they can be described and accessed. This means that the initial pass of unhiding needs to gather data that supports planning for reformatting or other means of access, after which descriptive documentation can take place if it does not exist already and the content can be consumed upon request. Without a technical reckoning of the collection, realistic planning for budgeting, staffing, workflows, and timelines cannot take place. You can get a penny for your thoughts, but not for shelves full of unknown, inaccessible assets.

— Joshua Ranger

AVPS Attending SAA 2012

AudioVisual Preservation Solutions President Chris Lacinak and Senior Consultant Joshua Ranger will be at the upcoming Society of American Archivists conference in San Diego. This will be the first year that AVPS will have a booth in the Expo hall. While we’ll try to take in as many sessions as possible to keep up on trends and developments in the field, we’re very excited to support SAA as well as for the opportunity to meet colleagues and discuss media preservation. Plus, we’ll have AVPS buttons, so stop by Booth 315 and see us!

How Necessary Is Rehousing Archival Audio & Video?

When I was first out of school I interviewed for a project archivist position with a long-standing acting school in New York. The interview was with the director of the school who, to understate it, was somewhat dramatic, and the whole thing felt more like an audition than an interview. It even started off with what seemed like an improv exercise. As soon as I sat down the director said, “Okay. You’re given a box of archival materials. It’s a mix of papers, tapes, maybe some books or photos. What do you do? Go.”

Being a freshly minted archivist I of course was cautious, describing how I would assess the contents and their arrangement in the box, and then deliberately and carefully remove them to begin identification and plan my approach.

At some point the director began waving her arm in the air, saying, “Stop stop stop. Why does everyone always say the same thing?!”

**************************

I didn’t get that job — very likely because I asked for a living wage — but I have frequently thought of that interview experience, wondering why that response would bother a non-archivist so much, but also wondering exactly why I said the same thing as everyone else.

The simple answer there is, of course, the result of my training in the standards and traditions of archiving. Not having a lot of practical experience at that point I hadn’t yet been confronted with the real world application of those standards beyond the idealism encased in ivied walls.

To be sure, standards and methodologies are necessary as reference points, but as with cooking, true skill comes in understanding not just the What, but the Why and How. It is the difference between being able to follow a recipe and being able to cook.

One area I’ve been looking into the Why is rehousing. I know MPLP-style processing has tried to limit this for paper materials from a workflow point of view, but the love for non-acidic and polypropelene enclosures is hard to break. Especially if they’re very small or custom made.

I understand the need for rehousing at the item/folder/box level for paper, photographs, and film materials. First, it helps store things on limited shelf space to have some regularity in their form and arrangement and can also provide some form of intellectual arrangement to aid discovery. Second, for things that last a long time, storing them in a way that promotes that extended longevity makes sense. If you can make a film last 100 years instead of 30, why not invest in that?

But audiotape and videotape present a number of issues here. Primary is the basic availability of materials. Archival (inert polypropylene) containers really only exist for VHS, audiocassettes, and 1/4″ open reel — essentially the widely adopted commercial formats that have existed in large quantities in lending libraries (beyond just archives). Without that use case, those containers would have likely never been produced in large quantities. The lack of options means that the most at risk tape formats (and those that will be at high risk in 10-20 years) do not have an option for rehousing for long term storage.

But is this actually a problem?

Planning for long term storage of 2″ Quad or 3/4″ U-matic may not be that worthwhile of an exercise. Many tape formats are at the point condition- or obsolesence-wise where near term reformatting is really the only option for preservation. A 1/2″ open reel videotape will not appreciatively gain from being placed in a new container.

This begs the question, then, of what the benefit is of rehousing audiocassettes, VHS, and 1/4″ open reel tape. Reformatting is an unavoidable activity. Is anything gained in the cost expenditure of equipment –> rehousing –> processing –> reformatting versus just reformatting? Physically speaking, does 3 years in polypropylene significantly counteract 45 years in acidic cardboard or vinyl? Is it worth it to spend $10,000 on plastic case rather than on reformatting or on playback equipment? Any practical experience or opinions on this issue out there?

— Joshua Ranger

5 Tips For What Not To Do When Creating A File Naming Structure

The human desire to classify and name is a highly personal and a greatly prized act. Naming the files we create is no different, though the number of files and tools used for managing them place a great need on consistent structure and application of file naming guidelines. What to do is then very simple – consistency. More to the point is what not to do in order to avoid pitfalls.

• 5 TIPS FOR FILE NAMING (PDF)

Is Hoarding An Archival Activity?

When I first moved to New York I lived in the Brooklyn Chinatown section of Sunset Park, an approximately 20 block long area sandwiched between a largely Hispanic section of the neighborhood and the primarily Hasidic Boro Park neighborhood. On my block was a small Indian bodega (which I’m guessing is a term that has transcended its original classification) that carried a large selection of Bollywood films on VHS. I never saw anyone shopping in this store but assumed it must be serving some nearby Indian population, given the broad ethnic mix of the area and the stacks of videocassettes with Xeroxed cover art taped to the plastic housing — a common enough site not just in New York but anywhere I’ve lived with an immigrant population large enough to support their own “specialty” grocery store. (Well, I assumed that was the case…either that or it was just another front for some undocumented, cash only business. Again a seemingly common site in New York).

A recent article in the New York Times reported on this continuing phenomenon of VHS rentals available in immigrant heavy neighborhoods (“For Movies, Some Immigrants Still Choose to Hit Rewind”). Of course the article assumes this is something unique to New York because, well, New York, but, regardless, I still found a lot to think about packed into this “Hey look, people do things” story.

In a way, the anecdotes made me feel a smidge less vehemently against the “We are all archivists” creed. Not because I would call some of the people in the article archivists, but because I recognize common struggles and discussions about using and managing media collections. We have the characters enamored with the ritual and aesthetic of the format and technology (Yes, for VHS. There are people who love video more than film.) (“‘They’re not living things, but it’s alive,’ he added, his eyes brightening. ‘There’s something there. You put it in the VCR, and it comes alive.'” … “Anyway, she added, using videocassettes ‘feels like an old Korean tradition kind of thing.'”). We have the characters storing tapes every which way but loose as they struggle with inadequate space and facilities (“Mr. Matsoukas is now saddled with about 40,000 videocassettes, a vast majority of which are stuffed into the boxes and garbage bags that clog the shop’s basement. Others line bookshelves, or are stacked in blocks on the floor and the counter.”). We have the characters unwilling or unable to deaccession (a kinder way of saying hoarding) because there might very well be something unique among the ruins (“Mr. Matsoukas offered a practical reason for his devotion: not all tapes have been transferred to more modern formats, and among them may be a rarity, if not the only surviving copy.”) or some person somewhere some day may be looking for something (“Mr. Sangotte and other shop owners said that as long as there remained a possibility of eking out some revenue from their cassette stock, they would suffer the clutter.”). This is coupled with the dream of monetization, that somehow there is the chance of realizing direct monetary exchange for materials that cannot currently be sold 10 for $1, or less (“The last time he tried to donate some to the public library, he said, he was rebuffed.”).

One day last summer I was walking in my neighborhood and passed a man setting up a table full of VHS tapes. He was telling a bystander, “I’m going to stay out here all day and sell every on of these.” I imagine he’s still there.

Common characters. Common struggles. Common discussions. But here’s where the Archivist typically (or typically should) differ — by taking action. Items might be unique? Take an inventory and do some research to find out for sure. Can’t deaccession? Develop a policy and enact it. Have your tapes stored in garbage bags? Take them out and put ’em on a shelf. Want to monetize your collection? Well…Quit archiving and purchase or license some other kinds of materials out right.

Sorry. No easy answers for any of this. There no getting around the fact that resources are needed to take action, but, in truth, it’s our training and our duty. It’s what we should strive towards doing. I reckon moaning to the New York Times is one form of advocacy, but I would prefer the human interest on me to be about an archiving success, not my problems. Well, about an archival success or about how many marshmallows I can stuff in my mouth and still say “Chubby Bunny”. I’d take that as well.

— Joshua Ranger

It’s Time To Start Considering Digital Materials As Legacy Formats

I know we all were very excited about the 50th anniversary of the first use of analog broadcast videotape six years ago…If by ‘we’ I mean myself, 7 friends, and that guy, Roy, whom no one has seen in person for the past 23 years.

Though still recovering from the celebratory parties we had back then, I’ve begun to take supplements to steel myself for this year’s anniversary of digital tape. Problem is, I haven’t yet received any party invitations. I know the USPS is not doing so hot right now, but, given the format in question, I would expect at least one of my co-revelers would be using e-vite or something. (Oh. Sorry USPS!) But, having scoured my spam folders, unless the party is in Nigeria this year, I’m still out of luck.

This situation made me think perhaps this Base 10 year-of-import isn’t such a big deal because the Jubilee party for data tape was 10 years ago.

Wait.

That means analog videotape turned 50 in 2006. Digital tape turned 50 in 2002.

Wait.

No.

This is true.

As pointed out in a recent column in the online Forbes magazine (thanks to Ryan Donaldson at the Durst Organization for the link) digital data tape is 60-years old this year. Not as old as audiotape, but older than video. And except for that time Malcolm appeared in Amazing Spider-Man, when has Forbes tried to pull a fast one on us? (For the sake of argument we’ll just ignore Steve for right now. As the American voting public did. Hey-O!)

Of course, this was just data tape, not digital audio or digital video formats. But still, the fact stands, digital technology has been with us a long time — longer than many of the analog formats that are currently causing us so many headaches right now.

This underscores a point I have been struggling with putting words to — namely, that the words we put to discussing digital preservation are inadequate or insufficiently precise to cover the multitude of technologies and media types involved. Digital is not a format like a book or a 16mm film or a Cartravision cartridge. It is a method of storage that can be utilized across various media and formats, including incredibly intangible ones such as holographic storage or incredibly physical ones such as punch cards. Almost analogous to analog, one might say.

In this way, I, Joshua M Ranger, feel that the arguments over analog v. digital are, ultimately, academic. Ask me my aesthetic opinion, and you may or may not get a different answer, but that opinion is neither here nor there nor in the past nor in the future. To argue for or against the use of digital formats on aesthetic grounds, however, does nothing to help preserve them. Digital has existed and will continue to exist — at least until on or about December 2012. To preserve digital materials is not a rejection of the analog, but to reject addressing the preservation and long term management of digital files as they have existed and currently exist is to forego 60 years of our shared history. A sliver off a micron of human history to be sure, but still .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000314 larger a portion than analog video.

— Joshua Ranger

Are Archives Not Deaccessioning Enough?

At the Spring MARAC meeting during a panel on digital preservation, a presenter showed a slide of a Post-it note adhered to an inaccessible disc that said “Save in case of miracle.” In archiving we are constantly faced with the decision (or non-decision) point of saving a decayed/corrupted original just in case some future means of reformatting is invented that will allow us to recover it versus the deaccessioning of assets that are of questionable research/resource value. These decisions are complicated by the collector’s mentality many of us possess as well as the creative, problematizing minds we must develop for archival work… I mean, just what if the percentage of a VHS tape used for recording versus its recordable length becomes an important research topic in 40 years?

There were a number of panels that touched on the issue of deaccessioning as part of archival processing, such as the seemingly easy decision to jettison eight cartons of college catalogs that were neither rare nor had any annotations or extra meaning to the collection beyond the fact that they were in the subject’s office (though a researcher did try to stop the deaccession). But there was also the reminder that the urge to save everything justincase (or because that’s what people non-conversant in the struggles over space and resources an institution faces expect) is a powerful force in our decision (or non-decision) making.

This issue comes up for me a lot because while the Save Every Frame ideology sounds nice it is incredibly impractical for the vast majority of archives out there (and not necessarily desirable, either, when truly weighing the curatorial value of all accessioned assets), but also because in my work I must necessarily approach recommendations from a technical aspect sprinkled with what I can glean in regards to institutional values and character. This is the collaborative nature of working with an organization where we combine our areas of expertise to hopefully arrive at an acceptable and realistic prioritization/preservation plan. I factor in valuation as much as I can, but my knowledge is not as deep as those within the institution.

As an outsider in this way (as opposed to the myriad other ways) there are many asset types I wonder about as far as their value to the institution or the appetite for maintaining them. Trims and outtakes from film projects are an obvious area I seen some discussions on, but what I run into more often are what I call courtesy copies — those typically 1-5 minute stories created by an outside news/information program about an institution or event, copies of which are regularly provided to the news story subject.

These may document an event or topic that the institution has not itself documented and may be of value as such. By the same token, they may be low quality versions provided on now obsolete or problematic formats, and very often on cassettes that have a much greater capacity than actual program running time (oh the 1/120th full VHS tapes I’ve seen…).

Though certainly of value to institutional history, these tapes present a great burden to physical storage resources and a great challenge to preservation decisions. Does a poor VHS dub warrant an uncompressed video preservation master, or may a lossy, more manageable format make more sense for digitization? Should the originals be saved, should one rely on the original creator to maintain a high-res version for the future, or should one take on the anticipated role of the de facto archive…Just in case? And, really, what value does a receiving institution place on these copies beyond “Well, we have it, so we should save it,” especially if burdened with formats for which they do not have playback capabilities or content of questionable copyright status? I would guess that news organizations are looking for cheaper and cheaper ways to send courtesy copies, including low-res digital files they can simply email to avoid the cost of media and postage. Where does a low bit-rate MPEG4 fit into a full-on preservation plan?

To be clear, I’m not claiming these types of materials are worthless, but asking colleagues who hold such assets how they view the value, use, and challenges of them. And not just on the content level, but on the practical level of storing, managing, and potentially reformatting (and then storing and managing those copies) those boxes and boxes and boxes of audiocassettes, DATs, VHS, U-matic, DVCam, etc., etc., etc.

***********************************************************************

In the end, these questions matter, are difficult, and point to the many resource burdens of preservation. However, the answers to such questions point to the institutional benefits of preservation and reformatting. No, it isn’t a reliable plan to reformat for licensing and monetization. And, yes, it does cost a good chunk of change to reformat for content that is potentially low quality and not currently unique. But the value to an institution’s character, to be able to say This is our history and This happened here and the world cared enough to document it —— to be able to show employees This is what you’re supporting through all of your contributions to the institution —— to be able to show patrons This is the tradition you’re becoming a part of —— these concepts are evaluated beyond monetary worth. They speak to the value of the mission and the continued support of the organization, and they speak to the value of archives in housing and providing access to that incalculable benefit.

— Joshua Ranger

The Need To Change Our Concept Of Format From A Singular To A Complex Entity

“Words give a sentence its luster, and choosing them deserves intense attention.”
— Constance Hale, “Desperately Seeking Synonyms”

I’ve written before about words I’ve given up on, and though I’m not prepared to move on from my particular bête noire, I do have a new bugaboo after having read the article “Archiving, Preservation Move into 21st Century” in TV Technology. Don’t get me wrong — I’m very happy to see the topics of archiving and preservation addressed in broader forums and within more production and distribution centric venues. And the article in question does hit on many of the major issues facing digital preservation, such as longevity, storage, and interoperability.

Seeing as how I cannot seem to write a paragraph without saying “however”, however, I have to take up issue with the use of the broad term format and the elision of its multiple meanings. In the article, formats morph from original legacy media (16mm, BetaCam, etc.) to file formats/wrappers (though no mention of the complexity of codecs is made) to storage media (LTO, etc.) and on to storage methods that involve media but are not media (i.e., The Cloud).

Yes, these are all formats, but they are not the same type of format and, thus, require different methods of management/preservation and, especially with digital assets, are often found in combinations that create a complex system of storage and asset formats. This is in part why I have written that digital preservation is not a format problem but a communication and a resource problem.

Economics and human nature dictate that there will never be a single file format and file storage solution, so the job of the archivist will necessarily be the selection and management of the various options available. This is also why I have written about the need for archivists to better collaborate with IT departments and other stakeholders in order to find or develop solutions that address the functional requirements of the organization.

This is something that the TV Technology article glosses over — especially when considering storage and use of the cloud. From my experience, vendors offering storage and cloud access are still pricing and designing towards text and photos. Costs are calculated at the per GB level. When an hour of moving image content can range from 100GB to 1TB, this kind of pricing structure and technical infrastructure cannot hold — nor can it be afforded by many institutions.

In the end we have to acknowledge that, just like preservation of physical items, the preservation of digital materials involves a range of informed decision points that may not end in the same conclusions as other organizations. Digital is no more of a format than analog is — there are formats that fit within those categories, but to speak about them as singular entities with singular solutions is an 18th century rather than a 21st century mindset.

— Joshua Ranger

AVPreserve Blogging With Post Magazine

AVPS has been invited to contribute a monthly blog to the Post Magazine website. For 25 years Post has been one of the premiere journals covering issues that interest and affect people in the post-production field, including film, television, videogames, animation, audio, the Web, and more. Based on our experience with production, engineering, and range of commercial and academic archives, AVPS will focus on the archiving and preservation topics that can impact the workflows and long-term usability of audiovisual content beginning at the point of production and following through to distribution and archiving.

The first post is available online now: “Why Is A/V preservation such a nuisance… and necessity” by AVPS Senior Consultant, Joshua Ranger. This is an exciting opportunity to expand the preservation conversation between creators and caretakers. We’re grateful to Post and look forward to working together.

Post Positions: Archive Now For Later

A guest opinion piece by Chris Lacinak featured in Post Magazine on the importance of using preservation oriented workflows in a production environment. Establishing reliable preservation and archival practice makes sound business sense, promoting efficient and cost-effective workflows, providing find-ability and the wherewithal to support premium repurposing projects.

• POST MAGAZINE ARTICLE (Link to Website)

« Previous Page — Next Page »