The Current Film Preservation Crisis and What Needs to Be Done

I thought this might be of interest. The change to digital is not without casualties.

The Current Film Preservation Crisis and What Needs to Be Done

richard09 wrote:

I thought this might be of interest. The change to digital is not without casualties.

It is not "the change to digital" which is causing the crisis in film; it is the impermanence of film stock and the attitudes of the industry toward preservation. Many many people are spending tons of hours and dollars preserving our film legacy but for many films it is too late, or there is insufficient interest. The industry is geared toward churning out the latest blockbuster and making huge profits, with very little attention or capital spent on preservation or celebration of the past. "Planned obsolescence."

It's even worse in the recorded music industry. In way too many cases master tapes were erased and re-used, due to cost and short-sightedness.

I think "crisis" is overstating the matter.

How many films are worth preserving? One percent? Less?

Some things are history; some things are just old.

Hell, NASA erased and recorded over the tapes of the original moon landing. I think a studio can be forgiven for not saving Devo masters, or safeguarding "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians" for posterity.

I like Devo. But yes, Sturgeon's Law: ninety percent of everything is crap.

Being a long-time believer in (and practitioner of) Sturgeon's Law, here's a bit of trivia:

Quote :

Derived from a quote by science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon, who once said, "Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud." Oddly, when Sturgeon's Law is cited, the final word is almost invariably changed to "crap".

We're less genteel than Mr Sturgeon.

_Howard wrote:

Being a long-time believer in (and practitioner of) Sturgeon's Law

How can one "believe" in a law? One can believe in a theory or a conjecture, but a law is proven fact and needs no leap of faith.