Today my topic is: “Film generation (original negative, fine grain or projection print, answer print, work print, etc.)”
For a preservationist, it’s important to think about the life-cycle of a film object, starting with its beginning in the camera, through its adolescence as it is edited and processed, its middle-age as it reproduces into prints, to its somewhat final resting, as its decaying body is kept alive in an archive. Now, with digital technology, many of the traditional processes used in the creation of a film are done digitally, but film archives, of course collect old films, which could have been created in a number of ways. When dealing with issues related to ‘restoration,’ preservation, and arguments about different versions of a work, knowing what element of the film you have in your collection could be important.
Generally, it seems that film archivists want to preserve the version that is as close to the first generation as possible, though different versions may also be valuable and interesting for research purposes. If a film gets re-made and is further away from the original print, quality can be lost. We have probably all noticed that quality is lost when film is transferred to video, but the same thing can happen through generations of film, especially if they are not handled well or if it is a popular film and many copies are made.
As, I’m unfamiliar with a lot of this terminology, I’ll try to provide the definitions of some of the things I’ve been asked to write about:
OCN: The original camera negative (OCN) is defined on Wikipedia as “the film in a motion picture camera, which captures the original image. This is the film from which all other copies will be made. It is known as raw stock prior to exposure.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_camera_negative).
Workprint: “After the film is processed by the film lab, they will assemble the camera rolls into lab rolls of 1200 to 1500 feet. Workprints may be made for viewing dailies or editing the picture on film.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_camera_negative).
“A workprint is a rough version of a motion picture, used by the film editor(s) during the editing process. Such copies generally contain original recorded sound that will later be re-dubbed, stock footage as placeholders for missing shots or special effects, and animation tests for in-production animated shots or sequences.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workprint).
Answer print:
“Answer print refers to the first version of a given motion picture that is printed to film after color correction on an interpositive. It is also the first version of the movie printed to film with the sound properly synced to the picture… They are used by the filmmaker and studio to ensure that the work going in to the film during the post-production process is cohesive with the final goals for the project.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answer_print).
Interpositives and Internegatives
“After approval of the answer print, interpositives (IPs) and internegatives (INs) are created, from which the release prints are made.
…the IPs and INs are regarded as the earliest generation of the finished and graded film, and are almost always used for transfers to video or new film restorations.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_camera_negative).
“An interpositive, IP or master positive is an orange-based motion picture film with a positive image made from the edited camera negative… The interpositive is made after the answer print has been approved. All lights and opticals from the answer print are repeated when striking the interpositive, and once the IP exists, the original negative can be vaulted.
…[it] historically has had only one purpose, namely, to be the element that is used to make the internegative…the only time the IP is touched is on the occasion of making the first or a replacement internegative. Since interpositives are used so rarely, they are usually the film element that is in the best condition of all the film elements." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpositive).
“An internegative is motion picture film stock used to make release prints for distribution to movie theatres” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internegative).
Release print:
“A release print is the reel of film that is sent to a movie theater for exhibition.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Release_print).
I’m assuming that the fine grain print and the projection print are somewhat similar to what is called here the “release print.” Anyone can correct me on that if they have more information about that. Thanks.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Thursday, October 23, 2008
What’s going on right now in news and television preservation?
I'm sure there is a lot going on in both of these areas, but I decided to focus on a project currently underway, funded by the Library of Congress, called Preserving Digital Public Television. ( http://ptvdigitalarchive.org/ ) While some programs are still shot on film or on analog video, many are digitally shot, and virtually all of them are digitally edited. This digital content needs to be preserved. The program site states that there is no mandate and little funding for the preservation of the rich cultural resource that is public television. The project is working on developing a repository and standards, creating a test model, creating guidelines for appraisal and looking at possible sources of funding for the project.
The Web site also discusses the difference between preserving the analog materials and the born-digital files:
“We are rapidly approaching the “tapeless environment” – where programs will live solely as “disembodied” assets, attached to their metadata, distributed and stored in a totally digital environment. This introduces an entirely new set of issues and problems relating to long-term program preservation, for which no coordinated strategy yet exists in public television.
While digital material is generally easier to duplicate, it is also more fragile. Hard disks fail at the rate of roughly 2 percent per year, which means that digital materials must be constantly checked, backed up, restored, and migrated from older to new disks.”
They have been making inventories of at risk programs and creating educational materials on file formats and metadata. They are also working with Turner Broadcasting to develop a standard MXF wrapper for preservation of program files.
In the future they hope to work preservation into the workflow of news and television programs. They are working with PBS and NYU on this project. The organization of the project is made more difficult because video and analog materials are not all stored together, and even though they are public programs, copyright is an issue.
CPB has been developing the PBCore metadata standard. (http://www.pbcore.org/ ). PBCore is similar to a Dublin Core (http://dublincore.org/) schema. Similar elements include Identifier, Title, Subject, Description, Creator, Language, etc. Some of the elements I did not recognize from DublinCore were AudienceLevel and AudienceRating.
To compare what the U.S. is doing to other countries the Web Site writes, that while the U.S. is having problems making things accessible online because of copyright, the BBC, the The Institut National de l’Audiovisuel (INA) in France, and programs in the Netherlands and Japan, are all working to put massive amounts of material online and accessible.
Finally, if you are interested, here is a Web cast of Nan Rubin about preserving digital public television at Thirteen. http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=3848
The Web site also discusses the difference between preserving the analog materials and the born-digital files:
“We are rapidly approaching the “tapeless environment” – where programs will live solely as “disembodied” assets, attached to their metadata, distributed and stored in a totally digital environment. This introduces an entirely new set of issues and problems relating to long-term program preservation, for which no coordinated strategy yet exists in public television.
While digital material is generally easier to duplicate, it is also more fragile. Hard disks fail at the rate of roughly 2 percent per year, which means that digital materials must be constantly checked, backed up, restored, and migrated from older to new disks.”
They have been making inventories of at risk programs and creating educational materials on file formats and metadata. They are also working with Turner Broadcasting to develop a standard MXF wrapper for preservation of program files.
In the future they hope to work preservation into the workflow of news and television programs. They are working with PBS and NYU on this project. The organization of the project is made more difficult because video and analog materials are not all stored together, and even though they are public programs, copyright is an issue.
CPB has been developing the PBCore metadata standard. (http://www.pbcore.org/ ). PBCore is similar to a Dublin Core (http://dublincore.org/) schema. Similar elements include Identifier, Title, Subject, Description, Creator, Language, etc. Some of the elements I did not recognize from DublinCore were AudienceLevel and AudienceRating.
To compare what the U.S. is doing to other countries the Web Site writes, that while the U.S. is having problems making things accessible online because of copyright, the BBC, the The Institut National de l’Audiovisuel (INA) in France, and programs in the Netherlands and Japan, are all working to put massive amounts of material online and accessible.
Finally, if you are interested, here is a Web cast of Nan Rubin about preserving digital public television at Thirteen. http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=3848
Friday, October 17, 2008
VRA Core
According to the VRA Core Web site, (http://www.vraweb.org/projects/vracore4/) VRA Core 4.0, (the most recent iteration of this metadata schema) was created by the Visual Resource Association’s (VRA is an organization dedicated to research and education related to managing images) Data Standards Commmittee , and is geared towards the ‘cultural heritage community.’ It can be used to describe works of visual culture, images that document those works, as well as collections of these objects. Version 4.0, released in 2007, is closely related to the content standard CCO (Cataloging Cultural Objects). VRA Core 4.0 can also be used within METS.
The VRA Core Web site includes a PDF “VRA Core 4.0 Introduction,” from which the following info is derived. VRA Core does not really have any required element types, however there are 5 core element types that generally should be described for all works. Those are:
WORK TYPE (what)
TITLE (what)
AGENT (who)
LOCATION (where)
DATE (when)
In VRA Core 4.0, “Agent” is a broader term used instead of “Creator,” and can be refined using sub-elements, such as “name,” “role,” and “culture.” “Culture” would include data about the culture or nationality of that agent. The other element, “Cultural Context” denotes the culture within the work or image was created, which is not always the same.
The VRA Data Standards Committee has also developed an XML Schema for VRA Core 4.0 elements. As such, data is divided into elements, sub-elements and attributes. (The VRA Core 3.0 used ‘qualifiers’ instead of sub-elements and attributes.)
In VRA Core 4.0, attributes can be used to modify an element or sub-element.
Some attributes are global because “they can be used to modify any element or sub-element rather than being tied to any specific one.” These include:
extent, dataDate, href, pref, refid, rules, vocab, source, and xml:lang.
The XML Schema allows collections to share information with others, and VRA Core 4.0 includes both a restricted and unrestricted schema, to offer collections some options for sharing.
VRA Core suggests on their site using controlled vocabularies to populate certain metadata fields. Suggestions include: Thesaurus for Graphic Materials (TGM), Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT), Union List of Artist Names (ULAN), and the Thesaurus of Geographic Names (TGN). They also suggest using a standard for formatting the data in the record, the Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) guidelines.
As with the Dublin Core standard, every record describes only one object. This is referred to as the ‘1:1 priciple.’However, the “relation” can show the ways in which different object and resources are related. These relations can be ‘work to work,’ ‘image to work,’ or ‘image to collection/work to collection.’
There are also administrative elements, like “source” and “rights.” “Source” operates differently for a work or an image record. For the Work Record, “source” includes data about the source of information where the cataloging information is taken from, whereas for the Image
Record source includes data about the publication or person from whom the image is taken.
The VRA Core Web site includes a PDF “VRA Core 4.0 Introduction,” from which the following info is derived. VRA Core does not really have any required element types, however there are 5 core element types that generally should be described for all works. Those are:
WORK TYPE (what)
TITLE (what)
AGENT (who)
LOCATION (where)
DATE (when)
In VRA Core 4.0, “Agent” is a broader term used instead of “Creator,” and can be refined using sub-elements, such as “name,” “role,” and “culture.” “Culture” would include data about the culture or nationality of that agent. The other element, “Cultural Context” denotes the culture within the work or image was created, which is not always the same.
The VRA Data Standards Committee has also developed an XML Schema for VRA Core 4.0 elements. As such, data is divided into elements, sub-elements and attributes. (The VRA Core 3.0 used ‘qualifiers’ instead of sub-elements and attributes.)
In VRA Core 4.0, attributes can be used to modify an element or sub-element.
Some attributes are global because “they can be used to modify any element or sub-element rather than being tied to any specific one.” These include:
extent, dataDate, href, pref, refid, rules, vocab, source, and xml:lang.
The XML Schema allows collections to share information with others, and VRA Core 4.0 includes both a restricted and unrestricted schema, to offer collections some options for sharing.
VRA Core suggests on their site using controlled vocabularies to populate certain metadata fields. Suggestions include: Thesaurus for Graphic Materials (TGM), Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT), Union List of Artist Names (ULAN), and the Thesaurus of Geographic Names (TGN). They also suggest using a standard for formatting the data in the record, the Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) guidelines.
As with the Dublin Core standard, every record describes only one object. This is referred to as the ‘1:1 priciple.’However, the “relation” can show the ways in which different object and resources are related. These relations can be ‘work to work,’ ‘image to work,’ or ‘image to collection/work to collection.’
There are also administrative elements, like “source” and “rights.” “Source” operates differently for a work or an image record. For the Work Record, “source” includes data about the source of information where the cataloging information is taken from, whereas for the Image
Record source includes data about the publication or person from whom the image is taken.
Monday, October 6, 2008
File Systems: An Important Topic for Digital Storage and Preservation
Before I started looking into what file systems were, or why they might be important for digital preservation, I had an idea of what they might be: the way that files are organized on your computer. There is, of course, a little bit more to it than that, and those of us interested in the organization of digital information, should know about the basics.
Different computer operating systems have different file systems for organizing information, both for presentation to the user through the GUI, and also for organizing on the hard disk for ease of access by the computers. The different aspects of how the file system is designed will show up in the way that ‘files ‘ are arrange in ‘folders’ within ‘directories’ on your computer. Is there a flat or a hierarchical structure? How long can file names be?
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system):
“More formally, a file system is a special-purpose database for the storage, hierarchical organization, manipulation, navigation, access, and retrieval of data.”
Common file systems are NTFS, the standard for Windows NT, including Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Vista. It replaced a file system called FAT, improving on FAT in a number of ways, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS), including the support of metadata, improved and speedier performance for getting to files, and more security, including the use of "journaling," which means that the file system documents itself, so that in a crash less information will be lost.
Macs use a file system now called HFS+.
I actually (surprisingly) found a really interesting and funny article on the history of file systems from Ars Technica. “From BFS to ZFS: past, present and future of file systems” http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/past-present-future-file-systems.arsin by Jeremy Reimer from March 2008.
Different computer operating systems have different file systems for organizing information, both for presentation to the user through the GUI, and also for organizing on the hard disk for ease of access by the computers. The different aspects of how the file system is designed will show up in the way that ‘files ‘ are arrange in ‘folders’ within ‘directories’ on your computer. Is there a flat or a hierarchical structure? How long can file names be?
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_system):
“More formally, a file system is a special-purpose database for the storage, hierarchical organization, manipulation, navigation, access, and retrieval of data.”
Common file systems are NTFS, the standard for Windows NT, including Windows 2000, Windows XP, and Windows Vista. It replaced a file system called FAT, improving on FAT in a number of ways, according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS), including the support of metadata, improved and speedier performance for getting to files, and more security, including the use of "journaling," which means that the file system documents itself, so that in a crash less information will be lost.
Macs use a file system now called HFS+.
I actually (surprisingly) found a really interesting and funny article on the history of file systems from Ars Technica. “From BFS to ZFS: past, present and future of file systems” http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/past-present-future-file-systems.arsin by Jeremy Reimer from March 2008.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
The Format Wars: VHS
VHS (Video Home System) was developed by JVC in 1976, and beat out Sony’s Betamax, which had a higher quality of playback, presumably because VHS recorded a longer amount of time and cost less. VHS emerged in the 1980s as the standard for home viewing and recording and reigned until it was superseded by the DVD, which was introduced in 1997. Many studios stopped releasing VHS tapes by 2006, opting instead for DVDs. However, VHS tapes are still popular for recording television shows. VHS cassettes house ½ inch wide magnetic tape with a recording time of between two and six hours (Wikipedia: VHS, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VHS).
Wikipedia goes into more of the technical information on VHS:
“VHS tapes have approximately 3 MHz of video bandwidth, which is achieved at a relatively low tape speed by the use of helical scan recording of a frequency modulated luminance (black and white) signal, with a down-converted "color under" chroma (color) signal recorded directly at the baseband. Because VHS is an analog system, VHS tapes represent video as a continuous stream of waves, in a manner similar to analog TV broadcasts.”
VHS tapes suffer from degradation of quality whenever they are copied. According to the EAI site on preservation of video (http://resourceguide.eai.org/preservation/singlechannel/basicquestions.html) there is no universal preservation format for videotapes. They state that DigiBeta is currently the archival standard.
Some similar formats to VHS cassettes are the VHS-C, which was used for home camcorders, and Super VHS (S-VHS), which was a more high quality version of VHS aimed at professionals. (Video Preservation Web site from Stanford: http://videopreservation.stanford.edu/vid_id/vhs.html).
This is a pretty cute video made about the current format war between VHS and DVDs:
The virtual museum of vintage VCRs includes some information about VHS formats, besides other video formats:
http://www.totalrewind.org/mainhall.htm
And the following includes some information about the very important 'Betamax' case, which deals with copyright law related to consumers rights to record video of material under copyright, for in home use:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/B/htmlB/betamaxcase/betamaxcase.htm
Wikipedia goes into more of the technical information on VHS:
“VHS tapes have approximately 3 MHz of video bandwidth, which is achieved at a relatively low tape speed by the use of helical scan recording of a frequency modulated luminance (black and white) signal, with a down-converted "color under" chroma (color) signal recorded directly at the baseband. Because VHS is an analog system, VHS tapes represent video as a continuous stream of waves, in a manner similar to analog TV broadcasts.”
VHS tapes suffer from degradation of quality whenever they are copied. According to the EAI site on preservation of video (http://resourceguide.eai.org/preservation/singlechannel/basicquestions.html) there is no universal preservation format for videotapes. They state that DigiBeta is currently the archival standard.
Some similar formats to VHS cassettes are the VHS-C, which was used for home camcorders, and Super VHS (S-VHS), which was a more high quality version of VHS aimed at professionals. (Video Preservation Web site from Stanford: http://videopreservation.stanford.edu/vid_id/vhs.html).
This is a pretty cute video made about the current format war between VHS and DVDs:
The virtual museum of vintage VCRs includes some information about VHS formats, besides other video formats:
http://www.totalrewind.org/mainhall.htm
And the following includes some information about the very important 'Betamax' case, which deals with copyright law related to consumers rights to record video of material under copyright, for in home use:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/B/htmlB/betamaxcase/betamaxcase.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)