To help preserve her works, Cindy Sherman is offering to destroy and reprint old photographs

[Don_ih]

film is still tangible. Digital backup isn't

Also, someone may find your prints in a paper box after your kick the bucket. No one will be looking through your hard drive - if they can even access it.

 

[koraks]

Also, someone may find your prints in a paper box after your kick the bucket. No one will be looking through your hard drive - if they can even access it.

That's probably the most compelling reason to get rid of the prints & negs before old age really kicks in and the odds are getting thin.

 

[TJones]

Also, someone may find your prints in a paper box after your kick the bucket. No one will be looking through your hard drive - if they can even access it.

Some random person might not look at your hard drive, but a family member might if you passed that info on, same as you would with info about your bank accounts, debts, etc.

 

[TJones]

Many stories. However film is still tangible. Digital backup isn't an end all. If I have the negatives in my possession I can check up on them once in a while. They're not going anywhere barring a physical accident. Digital has a habit of just disappearing.

Currently I can't easily access my backed up files. My UPS died and I'm waiting on a replacement battery. I can plug in all my backup drives but what happened if the UPS fried them? I won't know until I boot them up again. Meanwhile my negatives are sitting on a shelf in a binder.

One copy is more vulnerable than multiple identical distributed copies. A single point of failure shouldn’t be able to fry all of your copies.

 

[Don_ih]

Some random person might not look at your hard drive, but a family member might if you passed that info on, same as you would with info about your bank accounts, debts, etc.

It's better to make a selection of photos you think someone else might be interested and give everyone who cares access to that.

No one wants to look through Grandpa's 387945 jpgs.

 

[TJones]

It's better to make a selection of photos you think someone else might be interested and give everyone who cares access to that.

Hard to do that with negatives.

 

[Don_ih]

Hard to do that with negatives.

Easy. They're called "prints".

 

[mtnbkr]

Many stories. However film is still tangible. Digital backup isn't an end all. If I have the negatives in my possession I can check up on them once in a while. They're not going anywhere barring a physical accident. Digital has a habit of just disappearing.

Currently I can't easily access my backed up files. My UPS died and I'm waiting on a replacement battery. I can plug in all my backup drives but what happened if the UPS fried them? I won't know until I boot them up again. Meanwhile my negatives are sitting on a shelf in a binder.

I'm coming up on 30 years in corporate IT including running commercial services for 3rd party customers...

No, digital files don't have a habit of disappearing. They just don't. If a file disappears, it's because some process acted on that file or a human deleted them. I have digital images (natively digital and scans of analog shots) going back to the 90s. I haven't lost a single one. I routinely take a stroll down memory lane and look at them too. So do my kids (especially the ones that predate their birth). I have a three-tier back up scheme, driven by scripts that run on a schedule. I have the original copy on the main system HDD, a back up on a secondary drive in the same computer, and a third back up on an external drive connected to a server in my basement. I've never had to restore a "lost" file and have only used my "backup" to restore my files when building a new system. For that, I manually run a backup to ensure the latest changes are captured and restore that to the new system when it's up and running. But I've never needed to restore a file that mysteriously disappeared.

Also, regarding your UPS. I doubt the UPS fried your drives if the fix is merely a new battery. UPS batteries are consumable and are replaced regularly. Unless the UPS died as a result of a lightning strike or major power surge, your drives are most likely just fine.

As for which would be easier for our descendants to use...
In order of ease:
Prints
Digital files
Negatives.

Sure, they can still look at the negatives, but most people today wouldn't have a clue how to get them converted to prints or digital files. Even my kids, who are fully aware of analog photography, wouldn't be able to take my binders of negatives and do anything useful with them in the short term. This is why I scan all of my negatives and print anything worth keeping.

Chris

 

[Cholentpot]

I'm coming up on 30 years in corporate IT including running commercial services for 3rd party customers...

No, digital files don't have a habit of disappearing. They just don't. If a file disappears, it's because some process acted on that file or a human deleted them. I have digital images (natively digital and scans of analog shots) going back to the 90s. I haven't lost a single one. I routinely take a stroll down memory lane and look at them too. So do my kids (especially the ones that predate their birth). I have a three-tier back up scheme, driven by scripts that run on a schedule. I have the original copy on the main system HDD, a back up on a secondary drive in the same computer, and a third back up on an external drive connected to a server in my basement. I've never had to restore a "lost" file and have only used my "backup" to restore my files when building a new system. For that, I manually run a backup to ensure the latest changes are captured and restore that to the new system when it's up and running. But I've never needed to restore a file that mysteriously disappeared.

Also, regarding your UPS. I doubt the UPS fried your drives if the fix is merely a new battery. UPS batteries are consumable and are replaced regularly. Unless the UPS died as a result of a lightning strike or major power surge, your drives are most likely just fine.

As for which would be easier for our descendants to use...
In order of ease:
Prints
Digital files
Negatives.

Sure, they can still look at the negatives, but most people today wouldn't have a clue how to get them converted to prints or digital files. Even my kids, who are fully aware of analog photography, wouldn't be able to take my binders of negatives and do anything useful with them in the short term. This is why I scan all of my negatives and print anything worth keeping.

Chris

Fellow sys admin here...well, formerly.

95% of population would see your post and ignore it. Or not understand it.

As for my UPS, yep. I'm replacing battery and I'll assume the drives still run but there's always what if?

 

[Cholentpot]

It's better to make a selection of photos you think someone else might be interested and give everyone who cares access to that.

No one wants to look through Grandpa's 387945 jpgs.

I make prints every year. My family chucked their negs and I was able to make decent scans of all the prints. I'm sure as time goes on the technology will get even better and a 4x6 print will be good enough to scan to higher quality.

 

[Arthurwg]

Maybe you could procure one of her originals and then take her to court. Give her a piece of your mind!

I would like to giver her a piece of my mind because I actually dislike her work. The more recent work is the worst. Great job of making UGLY.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm coming up on 30 years in corporate IT including running commercial services for 3rd party customers...

No, digital files don't have a habit of disappearing. They just don't. If a file disappears, it's because some process acted on that file or a human deleted them. I have digital images (natively digital and scans of analog shots) going back to the 90s. I haven't lost a single one. I routinely take a stroll down memory lane and look at them too. So do my kids (especially the ones that predate their birth). I have a three-tier back up scheme, driven by scripts that run on a schedule. I have the original copy on the main system HDD, a back up on a secondary drive in the same computer, and a third back up on an external drive connected to a server in my basement. I've never had to restore a "lost" file and have only used my "backup" to restore my files when building a new system. For that, I manually run a backup to ensure the latest changes are captured and restore that to the new system when it's up and running. But I've never needed to restore a file that mysteriously disappeared.

Also, regarding your UPS. I doubt the UPS fried your drives if the fix is merely a new battery. UPS batteries are consumable and are replaced regularly. Unless the UPS died as a result of a lightning strike or major power surge, your drives are most likely just fine.

As for which would be easier for our descendants to use...
In order of ease:
Prints
Digital files
Negatives.

Sure, they can still look at the negatives, but most people today wouldn't have a clue how to get them converted to prints or digital files. Even my kids, who are fully aware of analog photography, wouldn't be able to take my binders of negatives and do anything useful with them in the short term. This is why I scan all of my negatives and print anything worth keeping.

Chris

I;ve scanned film of family, some prints, and added digital pictures to slide shows that I gave to my daughter on a few SD memory cards. I also have these backed up on HDD's at home PLug in type to USB on anyone's computer.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Look at how much is now stored on the "Cloud". What do you think one of the prime targets of a major war would be, if not all kinds of critical E-infrastructure? Do the smart thing. Find a dry cave. Put your negatives and prints in there, and paint duplicates on the walls with charcoal and ochre. Those have proven archival for over 40,000 years.

 

[Cholentpot]

Look at how much is now stored on the "Cloud". What do you think one of the prime targets of a major war would be, if not all kinds of critical E-infrastructure? Do the smart thing. Find a dry cave. Put your negatives and prints in there, and paint duplicates on the walls with charcoal and ochre. Those have proven archival for over 40,000 years.

Oog's early work better.

 

[TJones]

Easy. They're called "prints".

You have prints of all your negatives? Or just some, the same as a subset of digital files can be printed, shared electronically, or passed down? And stored in multiple places.

 

[TJones]

I'm coming up on 30 years in corporate IT including running commercial services for 3rd party customers...

No, digital files don't have a habit of disappearing. They just don't. If a file disappears, it's because some process acted on that file or a human deleted them. I have digital images (natively digital and scans of analog shots) going back to the 90s. I haven't lost a single one. I routinely take a stroll down memory lane and look at them too. So do my kids (especially the ones that predate their birth). I have a three-tier back up scheme, driven by scripts that run on a schedule. I have the original copy on the main system HDD, a back up on a secondary drive in the same computer, and a third back up on an external drive connected to a server in my basement. I've never had to restore a "lost" file and have only used my "backup" to restore my files when building a new system. For that, I manually run a backup to ensure the latest changes are captured and restore that to the new system when it's up and running. But I've never needed to restore a file that mysteriously disappeared.

Also, regarding your UPS. I doubt the UPS fried your drives if the fix is merely a new battery. UPS batteries are consumable and are replaced regularly. Unless the UPS died as a result of a lightning strike or major power surge, your drives are most likely just fine.

As for which would be easier for our descendants to use...
In order of ease:
Prints
Digital files
Negatives.

Sure, they can still look at the negatives, but most people today wouldn't have a clue how to get them converted to prints or digital files. Even my kids, who are fully aware of analog photography, wouldn't be able to take my binders of negatives and do anything useful with them in the short term. This is why I scan all of my negatives and print anything worth keeping.

Chris

Vulnerability of digital data that is properly backed up has been a myth here for as long as digital has existed. The only change is how much easier it’s become to do the backups.

 

[Don_ih]

You have prints of all your negatives? Or just some, the same as a subset of digital files can be printed, shared electronically, or passed down? And stored in multiple places.

The process of making enlargements is itself a way of culling a negative collection. While you may revisit your negatives and decide to enlarge one you've never done before, it's a bit rare.

I don't know what you're asking. I didn't say anything against digital storage or making backups. It's a great policy for an institution. And it's fine for someone to do personally. But no way can you expect someone barely interested in your hobby and dealing with your estate to go through 25 or 30 years of digital photos that have not been cherry-picked. Chances are, they'll have no desire to look at them even if they're carefully sorted and organized. "Hmm, I'll copy the ones of me and sis to my phone and I'll drop these hard drives off at e-waste..."

Anyway. With the constant growth of digital media worldwide, it is actually impossible to institute a plan of backing up every bit of it on a routine basis. The world would reach a point where half the people in it were engaged in that activity full-time. The vast majority of it has to be deleted or left to rot.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I've only printed about 5% of what I consider my best chromes and negs (both color & b&w) taken over the decades. And the extant prints themselves would take many months to digitally catalog, even though I have an excellent copystand setup. It's my heirs I'm thinking about - how the hell they're going to deal with the whole damn collection, plus a significant amount from previous generations, some of which is of serious museum quality. Just any kind of digital record would be meaningless; it would have to give some kind of firm clue how I myself printed and cropped each respective image. And the only reason for that would be the many second prints which I in fact made, but neither had the time nor budget to dry mount.

I figure an heir will be so exasperated, they'll toss the whole matted print pile in a dumpster behind a pizza parlor late at night. Some hungry dumpster diver will come along and remark how much better the ketchup spattered crust (matboard) is than the typical thrown out leftover pizzas. At least someone will be appreciative.

 

[Cholentpot]

I've only printed about 5% of what I consider my best chromes and negs (both color & b&w) taken over the decades. And the extant prints themselves would take many months to digitally catalog, even though I have an excellent copystand setup. It's my heirs I'm thinking about - how the hell they're going to deal with the whole damn collection, plus a significant amount from previous generations, some of which is of serious museum quality. Just any kind of digital record would be meaningless; it would have to give some kind of firm clue how I myself printed and cropped each respective image. And the only reason for that would be the many second prints which I in fact made, but neither had the time nor budget to dry mount.

I figure an heir will be so exasperated, they'll toss the whole matted print pile in a dumpster behind a pizza parlor late at night. Some hungry dumpster diver will come along and remark how much better the ketchup spattered crust (matboard) is than the typical thrown out leftover pizzas. At least someone will be appreciative.

I spent the past few years digitally archiving a few generations of photos. It's a big job but it's well worth it. It also seemingly never ends.

 

[Arthurwg]

See New York Times Style Magazine, 7/5/25, "The Role of Cindy Sherman Will Be Played by Cindy Sherman."

 

[Don_ih]

See New York Times Style Magazine, 7/5/25, "The Role of Cindy Sherman Will Be Played by Cindy Sherman."

Well, that was rather .... unenlightening? Not exactly asking the hard questions. He forgot to ask what her favourite colour is and whether she takes milk in her coffee.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Look at how much is now stored on the "Cloud". What do you think one of the prime targets of a major war would be, if not all kinds of critical E-infrastructure? Do the smart thing. Find a dry cave. Put your negatives and prints in there, and paint duplicates on the walls with charcoal and ochre. Those have proven archival for over 40,000 years.

"Dead Sea Negatives" ??

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The process of making enlargements is itself a way of culling a negative collection. While you may revisit your negatives and decide to enlarge one you've never done before, it's a bit rare.

I don't know what you're asking. I didn't say anything against digital storage or making backups. It's a great policy for an institution. And it's fine for someone to do personally. But no way can you expect someone barely interested in your hobby and dealing with your estate to go through 25 or 30 years of digital photos that have not been cherry-picked. Chances are, they'll have no desire to look at them even if they're carefully sorted and organized. "Hmm, I'll copy the ones of me and sis to my phone and I'll drop these hard drives off at e-waste..."

Anyway. With the constant growth of digital media worldwide, it is actually impossible to institute a plan of backing up every bit of it on a routine basis. The world would reach a point where half the people in it were engaged in that activity full-time. The vast majority of it has to be deleted or left to rot.

I scanned all the family shots and gave them to my daughter on a couple of memory cards, who barely has an interest in those, much less pictures I;ve taken here and there. Make prints of some of these and give them framed so that people can to them up on their walls or on their coffee tables and view them now. That way, you the photographer can enjoy the thanks and appreciation from family members.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I've only printed about 5% of what I consider my best chromes and negs (both color & b&w) taken over the decades. And the extant prints themselves would take many months to digitally catalog, even though I have an excellent copystand setup. It's my heirs I'm thinking about - how the hell they're going to deal with the whole damn collection, plus a significant amount from previous generations, some of which is of serious museum quality. Just any kind of digital record would be meaningless; it would have to give some kind of firm clue how I myself printed and cropped each respective image. And the only reason for that would be the many second prints which I in fact made, but neither had the time nor budget to dry mount.

I figure an heir will be so exasperated, they'll toss the whole matted print pile in a dumpster behind a pizza parlor late at night. Some hungry dumpster diver will come along and remark how much better the ketchup spattered crust (matboard) is than the typical thrown out leftover pizzas. At least someone will be appreciative.

If you want to be remembered, you'd be better off scratching your initials into an old oak tree.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Defacing rocks and trees is how dumb jerks and punk vandals try to get remembered, Alan. Now they prefer spray paint.