Digital color outlast Analog color?

[Peltigera]

To be considered, artistically & financially, as a FINE ART print!

Why, when a water-colour painting is not particularly light resistant. No one says Turner's water-colours are not fine art and no one displays them in bright light, either.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

For digital prints, save the file and print another one.

 

[falotico]

The problem with digital is that the electronic files are not permanent. A video expert who converts files to DVD's for the movie studios once told me that he handles only about 12 formats of encoding; anything else cannot be turned into an image. This is a serious problem because the electronic charges which make up the file are subject to decay and are vulnerable to magnetic fields and other environmental harms. Like film, if they are not archived soon after exposure there is a real risk that the images will be lost.

Finding the equipment to display some digital images might become impossible, like trying to play a video game from 1982. So far as I know there is no place on earth that can handle every digital format ever made and produce the corresponding image. Most likely, millions of images have already been lost.

This points out the need for paper prints. I like the ink jet stuff, but it reminds me of pictures printed in magazines. It's hard to feel the touch of the photographer's hand. Frankly, if they can find a stable yellow I vote for dye transfer.

 

[Richard Man]

Lets not spread ignorance - any digital image format can be reverse engineered and convert to a modern format if needed. The storage medium may be inaccessible, but the format is not the problem per se, if the image is important enough.

 

[fstop]

The problem with digital is that the electronic files are not permanent. A video expert who converts files to DVD's for the movie studios once told me that he handles only about 12 formats of encoding; anything else cannot be turned into an image. This is a serious problem because the electronic charges which make up the file are subject to decay and are vulnerable to magnetic fields and other environmental harms. Like film, if they are not archived soon after exposure there is a real risk that the images will be lost.

Finding the equipment to display some digital images might become impossible, like trying to play a video game from 1982. So far as I know there is no place on earth that can handle every digital format ever made and produce the corresponding image. Most likely, millions of images have already been lost.

This points out the need for paper prints. I like the ink jet stuff, but it reminds me of pictures printed in magazines. It's hard to feel the touch of the photographer's hand. Frankly, if they can find a stable yellow I vote for dye transfer.

That is very misleading from a so called video expert.
Digital media includes optical storage on CD format. No magnetism to lose.
A digital image can be stored in multiple areas on multiple media type, there is no decay to binary code.An image today can be reproduced on demand at any time with no loss of original quality within the next 1000 years.
A print made from analog or digital mediums will decay over time no matter what.

 

[falotico]

Of course I haven't called myself a video expert and don't pretend to be one. Encoding formats vary from place to place and I have never heard of a library which has instructions for every one which is used on planet earth. What about my guy who transfers video to DVDs? He is a professional and he admits that some artifacts have formats which he cannot access. We might come up with a universal translator, but none exists at the moment.

As far as the 1's and 0's lasting for a thousand years, this can only take place if copies are made. I concede that the copy can preserve one hundred per cent of the information contained in the code.

But what if no copy is made? Many DVD's use dyes--such as methylene blue--to record the information they hold. These kind of chemicals can degrade completely within a human lifetime. Flashdrives are vulnerable to static electricity. Hard drives are vulnerable to magnetic fields. I wouldn't guarantee any digital image preserved only in code to be accessible in twenty years. But I am very glad to learn more on this subject and hope to be informed.

 

[chip j]

A crack in the CD coating will let air into the metal signal base, corroding it.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

A crack in the CD coating will let air into the metal signal base, corroding it.

THat was 'CD rot' that could occur with some very early audio CDs. The Gold CDs were designed to eliminate this problem.

 

[chip j]

Oh, Thanks, Chip.

 

[snapguy]

ten

Moses had the Ten Commandments on stone and how long did they last?

 

[pentaxuser]

Moses had the Ten Commandments on stone and how long did they last?

The stone or adherence to the sentiments?


pentaxuser

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I strive to take photographs that allow me to be concerned about permanence. We'll get there yet...............

 

[barzune]

THEY WILL BOTH OUTLAST ME.

+1

 

[eddie]

Moses had the Ten Commandments on stone and how long did they last?

Even those weren't archival:
[video=youtube;4TAtRCJIqnk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TAtRCJIqnk[/video]

 

[JBrunner]

First of all, digital and analog are not storage or print mediums. That is loose thinking. Second, "gold super duper" optical disk has been in my painful personal experience less reliable than negatives. Third, choosing a print media based on longevity is, I suppose, a fine choice if you are preserving some anthropologically significant piece of culture. I have no illusions that my work will be of any significance in the future, and if by some bizarre twist it is it, will last far longer in it's current form than it needs to in order to be curated and preserved. The whole idea reminds me of a couple of guys arguing over how to split up the millions that a new half baked scheme is going to make them in the future. To my mind the whole chest pounding hooting SALES PITCH about "archivability" (pretty sure that's not a word) is as some guy once said, a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Since it's up, that's my 2 cents, YMMV and some will disagree. Oh, and digi vs analog is not something we really do here, so I need to close the thread, and put myself on my own ignore list.