|
|
Author
|
Topic: Is the force with me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 03-19-2002 07:59 AM
Two things I'd take issue with in the article on the bottom link.Firstly... quote: If you store it [nitrate] in large quantities of about 5,000 feet or more and in non approved storage cabinets without proper ventilation, it becomes a fire hazard.
Surely any nitrate is a serious fire hazard. If 5,000 feet were to ignite in a vault that also contained other film elements it would place the cans around it at risk from heat damage. I have seen a film of a 1,000 foot reel burning in an oil drum: afterwards that drum was buckled in places. Multiply the volume of fuel by five and bear in mind that film cans are made of much thinner and softer metal than oil drums, and I would not like to see the effects of even a small nitrate fire on anything else it was sharing a vault with. Furthermore, if those cans around it were vented, the highly toxic off-gases would surely affect their contents. It's certainly true that there are some film archives which are forced, due to lack of space, to store small collections of nitrate in a vault with other elements, but I have never seen this described as recommended practice. BTW, I'm also a bit sceptical about the mantra which says that all film cans should be vented. If you have separate vaults for different film bases, all at the ideal temperature and RH and all with high volume air circulation (i.e. at least X changes of air per hour) then I can see that it would do a good job in getting rid of the offgases from decomposition. But if you have to keep different types of stock in the same vault, then with vented cans I wonder if there could be the risk that the gases from decomposing elements could accelerate the decomposition in elements that started out in a much better state. quote: After nitrate base films have been duplicated, they should be destroyed.
Most archives do not do this, because if you destory the original you're denying yourself the chance to produce a better quality dupe if and when more effective copying techniques become available... quote: Even after such copies have been satisfactorily made, the nitrate material, which may be the best photographic material available, is not discarded. If it is still in a usable condition, it is stored in a controlled environment awaiting further use - perhaps for copying on a second occasion, for instance, after improved preservation techniques have been developed.
Source: Henning Schou (ed.), FIAF Preservation Manual, 1st ed. (September 1989), 5.2.1a (p.20).Again there's a financial issue here - only the larger and well-funded archives have the money to make new preservation dupes of the same nitrate originals twice - but I'd still feel cagey about destroying an original element in good condition. Over here, the British Film Institute will look after nitrate from the smaller public sector archives (such as the one I work for) on their behalf so thankfully we don't have to make such a stark choice.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|