[Leica] So much for "film is forever"..

[Mark Rabiner]

Here's a file from ten years ago 2005.
The amount of digital fading or corruption of any kind I'd say was hovering
around 0.0 to the zeroth power. If this was a color neg it would have faded
noticeably as the various color layers would have faded at different times
making for not difficult but impossible to print with an enlarger head color
crossover.
If it was Kodachrome the fading in ten years would have been barely noticble
if kept in conditions that a person would like to be in. or a black and
white carefully processed and fixed twice, hypo cleared and washed a real
long time.
That's film.
Paper is way less permanent.
One print which was fixed a bit weak or washed a bit weak gives off gasses
which effects all the other prints in the storage area. Obviously paper
fibers are harder to fix, wash and preserve than a plastic film base coated
with gelatin emulsion.

3/11/05, 3:00:16 AM, Tree Blossoms Portland Oregon, Nikon D100, 28.0 mm
f/1.4D

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/fridayflowers/050311_030016.jpg.h
tml

Or

http://tinyurl.com/mptvugl

Digital "fading" 0.000%





On 5/14/15 1:32 AM, "Mark Rabiner" <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:

> I work from my digital files from  the early 2000's when I started shooting
> digital they are in my same folder as my files going to this  year. By year. I
> have 14 yearly files labeled by year I've been shooting digital 14 years.
> They have not "faded". And by that I'd assume we mean gotten corrupted. As if
> the 0's and 1's got messed  up the result would not be subtle.
> The sensors were so bad those days one could think that was the case though.
> Digital fading.
> 
> But then again when I processed it now it looks better because the software is
> better and I'm better at using it. I was near clueless on photo crunching in
> 2004.
> 
> Here's one from 11 years ago
> Nikon D100 4/1/04, 9:40:24 PM, Fullers Coffee Shop Illuminated with red neon,
> 24.0-85.0 mm f/3.5-4.5D
> 
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/springdays/040401_214024.jpg.html
> 
> Or
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/n5wkqco
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/14/15 1:17 AM, "Spencer Cheng" <spencer at aotera.org> wrote:
> 
>> Canadian Archive uses microfiche which are stable for 100+ years (or
>> acid-free 
>> paper for documents). The Canadian census was stored that way. ³was² because
>> I 
>> am not sure we have a real census any more.

Digital storage is very
>> ephemeral. I doubt if most digital storage will last more than 10 years.
>> Those 
>> 1¹s randomly change to 0¹s far too frequently. I don¹t think archivist like
>> digital media very much.
>> 

Regards,
Spencer


_______________________________________________
Leica
>> Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more
>> information
> 
> 
> 




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/