Tossing Negatives After They've Been Scanned

[gbroadbridge]

Any negs older than 12 months either go to the client (if they want them) or they get scanned and shredded.

Storage space is money and if I'd kept 40 years of client negs it would be costing a fortune.
No client has ever come back after 12 months and if they did they'd get scans.

 

[gary mulder]

Obviously my thousands of negatives and slides will only be thrown away over my dead body. But this thread highlights a special aspect of the activity we are so passionate about, taking photos. Select the ones we want to keep.
Selection is an essential part of photography. On average, I have one in ten of my recordings that make it to a small print.
If a mother would keep all the photos she takes of her child with her phone and give them on a 1TB disk on the 18th birthday, that person would have an inhuman task to view all the photos on the disk. Without selection, the collection is worthless. The same would be true for our own collection of unselected negatives.
With film, it is almost impossible to keep just a selection. Making the collection valuable. With a digital archive, it is very easy to delete all recordings that do not make it. That makes a digital archive much more valuable, so I consult it more often. My film archive is just gathering dust.

 

[cerber0s]

I admit to having tossed a few rolls of negatives. They’ve either been test rolls that I just snapped to test a camera, or they’ve been poor quality for one reason or another.

 

[BMbikerider]

Whatever else you do hang on to the negs as if you life depended on it. All of my very early negs were destroyed when I was in the armed forces and following the death of my father, my mother cleared out the hose to move into a smaller place. No contact from her asking if I wanted them they were just dumped! They also included many negs of both of my parents and now I am left with very few, and some memories that are now fading because I have nothing to refresh them.
These contained also my early efforts that show how I managed to improve my work until it just stopped when they were destroyed. There is doubt about the longevity of colour negs but they were all B&W so would have had at least a chance of surviving.

 

[gbroadbridge]

Whatever else you do hang on to the negs as if you life depended on it. All of my very early negs were destroyed when I was in the armed forces and following the death of my father, my mother cleared out the hose to move into a smaller place. No contact from her asking if I wanted them they were just dumped! They also included many negs of both of my parents and now I am left with very few, and some memories that are now fading because I have nothing to refresh them.
These contained also my early efforts that show how I managed to improve my work until it just stopped when they were destroyed. There is doubt about the longevity of colour negs but they were all B&W so would have had at least a chance of surviving.

That highlights the importance of selecting keepers, printing them and putting them into a Photo Album.

I have many photos of my great-great grandparents that were passed down in Albums, with the negs long gone - either deteriorated to the point that they were useless or simply lost.

Printed photos are IMO, important whether the source is analog or digital.

 

[Bob Selders]

If negatives are a burden for photographers, I suspect prints are very rarely ordered with developing.

Black and white prints have the greatest longevity-if stored properly.

Regarding archiving family and friend images, the images are discarded if no one recognizes the people in the photo.

The cost of film has encouraged the thought process in exposing each frame with the outcome being more "keepers".

 

[Guy S]

prints, slides and digital files (provided the hard/software is on hand) are directly viewable, negatives always need to be transformed

 

[mtnbkr]

I'm on the fence about keeping negatives. I understand why one would want to, but I've never gone back and printed from a negative after a few weeks have passed. If I have a picture I want enlarged, I typically do that pretty soon after development. I might have a different take if I had a proper darkroom and could print directly from negatives, but since I don't, I either upload my scanned files for printing by commercial operations or send negatives out soon after they're developed. Once they go into the sleeve, they're pretty much ignored. I develop my own B&W film here at home and use my digital camera and macro lens to scan the negatives. Once I have a good scan, that is what I use for printing.

As for the risk of data loss... I follow the 3-copy model myself (one copy on the main drive, a 2nd copy on a separate drive in the same computer, and a 3rd copy on a removeable drive connected to my server in the basement). I also periodically make a 4th backup on a removeable drive that is stored at either my mom's house or my in-laws' house. Both are in other cities and not local. In nearly 30 years of doing this, I haven't lost a single file (photo or otherwise) through multiple system replacements, crashes, data migrations, etc. When I build a new system, I recover my archived data from one of these sources as well, so my backups are routinely tested. My backups are automated and run every night, though the 4th copy is a manual job since it doesn't happen very often. Yes, that means a gap between what is backed up at home vs what is delivered to the remote location, but the bulk of my precious files are there.

Chris

 

[mtnbkr]

If negatives are a burden for photographers, I suspect prints are very rarely ordered with developing.

I might print 2 or 3 per roll. I no longer do small prints though. Anything I print is going up on the wall in a frame.

Chris

 

[OAPOli]

I've given up worrying about what people do with their own stuff, when it's stuff that isn't important like personal photos.

I scan all my negatives. I toss all the bad ones (over 50%), and print my favorites in an album (probably 10%) once a year.

 

[Chan Tran]

Any negs older than 12 months either go to the client (if they want them) or they get scanned and shredded.

Storage space is money and if I'd kept 40 years of client negs it would be costing a fortune.
No client has ever come back after 12 months and if they did they'd get scans.

I agree with you because you're a professional. If something stops making money why keep it. You made it to make money to begin with. However, I would never throw away the negative unless I deem the image is worthless in any form,

 

[runswithsizzers]

The main reason I keep my negatives is because I may want to re-scan them if better digitizing methods become more available / affordable. Some of my early slides have been digitized a third time.

I keep my negatives in plastic sheets in 3-ring binders, in chronological order. All of the film I have digitized includes enough information in the metadata so I can find the negative, if needed. If I am trying to find a particular photo, it's much easier for me to search the digital files on my computer than it is to look through the binders full of negatives.

It's possible I might want to find a negative to have a wet print made, but on the rare occasion I want a print, I will probably send my digital copy to an online printing service.

I have been making photo books, so I do have physical versions of my better photos when I want to look at them on paper.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It makes sense for professionals, etc to toss negatives, to save space, but I'm talking more about us avid shooters. I have to admit to tossing negatives. Before I moved back to Canada, I went through the several hundreds that I accumulated over a 12 year period. Duplicates, and test negatives, mainly. I regretted doing that especially, when I started looking closely at negatives that I thought failed, and found compositions from within. Now I keep everything.
My grand father kept everything. In his storage locker, my mom found heaps of negatives that he photographed over the years, mostly made with his Target Six-20 (which I sometimes use!), and various other cameras, including snaps from his SX-70 (when it was first released and which I also sometimes use...I re-skinned it). My mom gave me all the negatives, and print them when I can. They are treasures.
Don't toss your negatives! Leave that up to your descendants The real problem is all those cameras that I've accumulated over the years!

 

[koraks]

One project is film based, and they do make tiny 5x7 prints at the end of the unit.

Are these prints made optically from the negatives? Or scanned and then digitally printed? What's the reasoning about this sole film-based project; i.e. why does your successor choose to use film here instead of digital?
I suppose it may not have come up in the conversation, but has this teacher considered simply handing the negatives to the students so they can do with them as they please?

 

[retina_restoration]

When I buy CDs, I rip them once, save the files, and throw out the CD. I mean, why keep the physical media, right? (laughs)

That said, why should I care if some instructor who teaches students a single film exercise tells them to throw away their negs at the conclusion of the exercise? How many of those students are going to regret that choice?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Are these prints made optically from the negatives? Or scanned and then digitally printed? What's the reasoning about this sole film-based project; i.e. why does your successor choose to use film here instead of digital?
I suppose it may not have come up in the conversation, but has this teacher considered simply handing the negatives to the students so they can do with them as they please?

They are printed in the darkroom.
He made a promise to the former photo teacher, that he would keep the darkroom side alive...and he has stuck to it, even if it is only one project per class.
No, he hasn't taken the time to explain how important the negative is to the students, so they don't know its value. I drilled this aspect into my students' heads.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

When I buy CDs, I rip them once, save the files, and throw out the CD. I mean, why keep the physical media, right? (laughs)

That said, why should I care if some instructor who teaches students a single film exercise tells them to throw away their negs at the conclusion of the exercise? How many of those students are going to regret that choice?

How many? I don't know, but some will. I've had a few visit me who took photography decades ago, telling me that they wished they had kept them, including prints.

 

[koraks]

They are printed in the darkroom.
He made a promise to the former photo teacher, that he would keep the darkroom side alive...and he has stuck to it, even if it is only one project per class.
No, he hasn't taken the time to explain how important the negative is to the students, so they don't know its value. I drilled this aspect into my students' heads.

Ah, I see; so do you recon he just does this to keep the darkroom alive? So no other ideas behind using film? I found the case interesting, because chucking away the negatives after the print is made suggests there could have been other motives in choosing film for capture in the first place. I would have liked to learn about those - but perhaps there aren't any.

 

[Chan Tran]

Are these prints made optically from the negatives? Or scanned and then digitally printed? What's the reasoning about this sole film-based project; i.e. why does your successor choose to use film here instead of digital?
I suppose it may not have come up in the conversation, but has this teacher considered simply handing the negatives to the students so they can do with them as they please?

Yeah if the negatives were taken by the students then he should let the students do whatever they please to them.

 

[AnselMortensen]

The negative is the score.
The scan is a bunch of zeros & ones orchestrated to resemble the score.

 

[grahamp]

I don’t want to get typecast as an inveterate film-disposer, I keep all negatives I develop myself.


But this argument holds for film too, one burst pipe, flood or fire and poof! Those somewhat flammable negs (still better than nitrocellulose) are ashes or sodden beyond recovery. How many here make duplicates of every roll or sheet and store them in another place?

I just think this argument is wielded rhetorically more than anything else. It has merit but its overstated.

Physical originals are at risk of external damage. So is the original (non-photographic) artwork on our walls.
Digital files are at risk of simple deletion, media failure, third-party agency issues, and simple technology drift.

I can take some precautions with my physical negatives, at least to the extent that, if they are damaged en mass, so is a lot else that I need/care about more.

Digital storage is at risk from things I have limited control over, and involves annual costs (equipment purchase and running, replacement, rental/lease of services).

As with everything in life, evaluate your risk and decide what you can afford in terms of loss and costs.

 

[GregY]

The negative is the score.
The scan is a bunch of zeros & ones orchestrated to resemble the score.

Theory/practice. It sure sounds like the programme Andrew retired from has been stripped down.
& students first negatives to commercial operations is a huge range to generalize about.
AM, I do agree....I have some negatives from my parents wedding that i printed...they'd never seen them. They were made before I was born. Scans....? how about those 5 1/2" floppy disks. I'll take negatives or glass plates every time.

 

[cowanw]

The negative is the score.
The scan is a bunch of zeros & ones orchestrated to resemble the score.

Ha! I read this as reassemble the score

 

[Bob Selders]

I might print 2 or 3 per roll. I no longer do small prints though. Anything I print is going up on the wall in a frame.

Chris

Nice!

There is the plan to have a darkroom and print at home. A plan that seems to get pushed further onto the future.

 

[mtnbkr]

Nice!

There is the plan to have a darkroom and print at home. A plan that seems to get pushed further onto the future.

If I had a darkroom I'd probably print a lot more (or more copies of the same shots with different crops, exposures, etc).

Chris