Hmm, old negatives are good enough that images taken in WWI are still viewable almost 100 years later – if stored correctly they will probably far outlast digital images.
I think there is too much reliance on digital media and to destroy the original negatives just to get a few bucks seems very shortsighted IMO…
Digital isn’t perfect and needs to be ‘handled’ correctly otherwise the image will degrade.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_loss
I completely agree that originals should be retained. What seems like a good digital copy of a negative today may look like a pretty low-resolution attempt in a few years time.
As regards longevity, in general film negatives seem pretty stable – but they aren’t immune from degradation. Try looking up “Vinegar Syndrome”. I’ve personally seen a number of negatives affected by that.
Digital images cannot degrade, but the storage medium can (and formats can be superseded). What that means is that digital copies need to be regularly recopied to ensure that are a (a) on a good medium, and (b) in a valid format. However, the cost/effort of recopying is getting cheaper all the time, so this isn’t necessarily a huge chore.
Just my 2p worth.
Sign In
