Digital is Not the Alternative: Dilemma and Preserving Films in India

1.1 Preserving Motion Picture on Celluloid (Film)

Celluloid is a fragile medium; it worsens over time. Since their inception, film archives have addressed problems such as deterioration, colour fading, wounds and bruises through projection and photochemical replication. The film is affected by physical damage and biological reactions. Film gelatine is a protein that serves as a food source for various biological vectors such as mould, bacteria and insects which cause the film to deteriorate. Figure 1 shows amber discolouration, silver fading and sticky gelatine caused by the breakdown of the nitrate base.

Figure 1:

Examples of film decay.

Significant areas of the image are completely lost. Ramesh Kumar (2016) asserts that the film has a tendency to get destroyed, which cannot be prevented. Archivists must look for alternative methods of preserving films, which can be preserved for centuries at the right temperature, humidity and pressure. Yet, films will fade; nothing can stop this. In such a scenario, archivists must take different approaches other than the physicality of the film. The film material must remain intact; archivists must preserve the inherent history, culture and aesthetics of film for future generations. In addition, the photochemical replication process results in a loss of detail with each successive generation of film prints (Fossati 2017). Therefore, duplicating the film is not a solution, and it is a challenge to preserve motion pictures on celluloid for future generations (forever). Archivists are trying alternative approaches to motion picture preservation to ensure their long-term viability.

The digital revolution not only impacts the production of motion pictures but also their preservation, restoration and accessibility (Ingravalle 2019). The dawn of digital technology has transformed the realm of film preservation, bringing unprecedented benefits and daunting challenges (Fossati 2017). Celluloid films have historically been subject to deterioration, often resulting in the loss of irreplaceable cinematic artefacts (Slide 2013). Nevertheless, the introduction of digital technology has created a safety net for the preservation of film heritage. Digitisation makes it possible to develop high-resolution scans and the restoration of films to their former glory (Antoniazzi 2021); not only does it protect classic films from physical deterioration, it also increases their accessibility and distribution.

1.2 History of the Film Archive

The concept of archives as a collection of human action is not just about what they hold but why they were created and how they were valued within the context of the society that produced them. Nevertheless, the cultural meanings and goals of an archive have evolved over time (Posner 2013). Michel Foucault uses the term archive to refer to the structures and processes that determine the potential expressions, uses, categorisations and connections between different pieces of information at a given point in time (Foucault 2002). The most comprehensive definition of an archive is provided by Jacques Derrida ([1995] 2017): “It is a collective, artificial memory.” In other words, it is an environment in which users use technology to enhance their memories and make them accessible to others. Archives function as both memory and technology centres while also being the place of origin, permanence, order and stability, secrets, and discoveries, open to the public (ICA 2016).

Derrida coined the term “archive fever”, which refers to the desire to remember in the dual sense of storing in memory and retrieving from memory. These elements reveal a hidden relationship between films and textual archives, which can also extend to visual materials. These philosophers do not refer directly to the film archive; even Derrida did not mention the possibility of experiencing film archive fever. When he describes an archive of photographs as “another species of archive”, he comes closest to mentioning a motion picture archive (Derrida 2010).

Since the introduction of film in the late nineteenth century, film artists have wanted to preserve their work. In 1894, the inventor of the kinetoscope, William Kennedy Laurie Dickson, advocated techniques for preserving his vitalised images. When he published Une nouvelle source de l’histoire – création d’un dépôt cinématographique historique (a new source of history – the creation of a historical cinematographic repository) in 1898, Matuszewski was more concerned with establishing film as a legitimate historical substance (Ballhausen 2008; Rossell 2023). Many film archives were created in the 1930s, with the Museum of Modern Art, New York, United States of America (USA), the first museum to preserve film in its collection in 1935 (MoMA n.d.). The following year, Henri Langlois, a visionary film archivist, founded the Cinémathèque Française (French film archive) in Paris (La Cinémathèque Française 2006), one of the largest film collections in the world, with more than 40,000 titles. Adolf Hitler inaugurated the German film archive Reichfilmarchiv in 1935, which was captured by Soviet troops in 1945. Germany’s political era also affected film archives; today, the largest film collection in Germany is maintained by Das Deutsche Filmarchiv (The German Film Archive), under which it joined the International Film Archives Federation (FIAF) in 1963. The British Film Institute (BFI) in the United Kingdom (UK), founded in 1933, began archiving films in 1936 (Dupin 2013). Ensuring the preservation of film heritage around the world requires close collaboration among film archives. Henry Langlois (1936) appealed to all film archives to come together, “Only when film archives of different countries will have established regular exchanges will one be finally able to know the true history of cinema.” Therefore, the International Film Archives Federation (FIAF) was established in 1938 with only four founding members: Germany, France, the USA and the United Kingdom. It currently has 94 affiliates in over 60 countries (Dupin 2013). In India, NFAI is the only government body affiliated with FIAF (FIAF 2023). The Film Heritage Foundation (FHF) is a non-profit organisation based in Mumbai that was admitted as an FIAF Associate member in 2015; it is dedicated to the preservation and restoration of Indian films and works nationwide to raise awareness about India’s film heritage (Film Heritage Foundation 2023a). Similarly, Prasad Film Labs restore films commercially. Although numerous government and private archives and libraries in India have film collections, the perception of film preservation in the country is notoriously dubious.

However, motion picture archives were not a segment of academic or archival discourse until the late twentieth century. In 1992, Halen Harrison compiled a bibliography of audiovisual archives literature for the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) (Harrison 1992). There is only one contribution from India, written by Prathmesh Krishnan Nair (P. K. Nair) (1933–2016), founding director of the National Film Archive of India, which indicates that archiving film was less valued and began much later in India than in the West.

Ray Edmondson asked the fundamental question of whether film archiving is a profession yet as he reflected on his original article in 1995, which celebrates the debut of film curation courses at universities while highlighting the advancement of film archiving in academia (Edmondson 2017). There is not a single institution that offers academic courses in film preservation in India, but several European universities have established academic programmes in film preservation and restoration. Film preservation has never been an academic discourse in India.

1.3 Film Archiving in India

Ramesh Kumar has done a comprehensive case study on the NFAI as part of his doctoral thesis. According to him, after its establishment in 1964, the NFAI focused on collecting pre-independence films. Nitrate film was used until the 1950s, and 1,700 films were produced during the silent film era, but NFAI was only able to save eight or nine films due to a fire in 2003 in NFAI’s nitrate collection, which destroyed most of the films (Kumar 2016). P. K. Nair worked for the organisation for 27 years and encountered a number of persistent problems during that time. Nair discussed the issues at NFAI, including lack of funding, lack of knowledge of film heritage and neglect of the industry (Kumar 2013a, 2013b).

Furthermore, while examining the challenges in preservation, Shivendra Singh Dungarpur (2014) claims that there is a lack of preservation culture in India. Indians maintain the oral tradition of transmitting information, which is decreasing with each generation, which has also led to a disregard for the preservation of films. He also adds that most of Indian history is written by foreigners, which leads to misunderstanding of the past (Dungarpur 2014). Thus, preserving films can be a method of composing Indian history.

There are several film archiving institutions in India, including the National Film Archive of India, Film Heritage Foundation, Prasad Film Labs, Bengal Film Archive, Aurora Archive and Annapurna Studios. NFAI and Bengal Film Archives are state-funded archives whose sole responsibility is to preserve Indian heritage. Most private archives are studio or lab archives that want to protect heritage commercially and have difficulty preserving their films due to the films’ fragility. Prasad Film Labs has emerged as a significant player in digital solutions for restoration and preservation; it is for-profit and offers exemplary facilities for preservation and restoration. Producers avail of services only on the condition that their films are acquired by OTT (Over-the-top) platforms or television channels. We have investigated these issues in detail in this article in Section 3.2.2.

1.4 Digital Turn and Dilemma

The possibility of long-term storage and reproduction is one of the key advantages of digital technology (FIAF 2009; Heftberger 2014). Additionally, digital copies of films are easily reproducible, meaning that future generations might have access to copies even if the original rolls of film expire. This democratisation of access and availability of film heritage holds immense potential, as broadening access to the Indian cinematic legacy transcends the mere benefit of empowering film enthusiasts and researchers. It cultivates a more informed and engaged public, fostering a richer appreciation for the power of cinema as an art form and historical document.

Stephen Prince (2004) defined the digital turn in cinema as a paradigm shift in the structure of production from start to finish, including art direction, photography, editing, audio, pre-and post-production, distribution and exhibition. Film archives also have access to a vast ocean of possibilities offered by digital technology. The acquisition, restoration and preservation of films is shifting from analogue to digital format (Fossati 2018) and, with the development of digital film production techniques, filmmakers have shifted to digital technology as a cost-effective, reliable and hassle-free way of production, distribution and presentation (Meena 2019). In 2012, Kodak, the leading celluloid films manufacturer, declared bankruptcy as it could no longer compete with modern technologies (Conrad 2012). Digital technology issues are among the threats to digital assets. Howard Besser (2001) described three problems with digital preservation. First, digital files and their corresponding storage media can become obsolete over time. Second, the custodians of the content may not be immediately identifiable. For example, it is possible that no one has yet agreed on which parties should have the appropriate level of knowledge to ensure the continued existence and accessibility of the content in the long term. Third, the content may not be as it appears on the screen due to copying or translation errors.

There are several problems with digital film preservation, including a lack of standards, rapid obsolescence of hardware and software and a lack of digital knowledge in archival repositories (Antoniazzi 2021). There are also astronomical costs associated with digitising and storing data. These problems show that digital preservation of (extensive) film collections is currently not feasible (Fossati 2017). According to a report from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS), a 4K digital master copy can cost over $12,500, while the average cost of storing a master copy of archival films is approximately $1,059 (Giardina 2007). In contrast, digitisation and digital preservation have become more economical in recent years. NFAI offers services such as digitisation and restoration in 4K for approximately $274 per minute of film and estimates around $32,000 for a two-hour film. NFAI charges approximately $3,000 for digitisation, while storage is offered for free (NFAI 2024). Although the cost of digitising and restoring has reduced significantly, it is not cheap enough to attract producers.

In addition, archiving digital information requires a lot of effort. Continuous monitoring, movement and management of the access system require human resources, an automated storage and delivery system and air conditioning (Heftberger 2014). Because digital technology is evolving so quickly, it is difficult to standardise on a single digital format, codec, compression rate and video playback device (Conrad 2012).

It is observed that the vast majority of repositories worldwide do not legally hold digitised films. Rights to older films are often sold and bought by various parties and the original production companies usually disappear, with clarifying rights a time-consuming and costly process (Wengström 2013). The digital archive has become part of the ever-changing ecosystem, however, archivists face the dilemma of using digital preservation methods for films, as they need to preserve film for the long term (Wengström 2013). The archivists are primarily concerned with the digitisation of film (Oscars 2014). They traditionally work with original film reels and, therefore, the idea of storing films digitally is met with scepticism (Wengström 2013).

Digital film archiving must address major issues, including technological obsolescence, storage, cost, standards and legal challenges. The digital dilemma has never been discussed in Indian scholarship, and the Indian perspective of digital film preservation has been overlooked. It is vital to start the discourse about the vulnerability of digital technologies, as it is crucial to understand the existing problems in Indian archives from the perspective of Indian film archivists.

The aim of this study is to examine the issues related to film and digital preservation of motion pictures among Indian archivists. The main goal is to increase the understanding of the digital dilemma faced by archivists, while there is also an attempt to evaluate the relationship between film and digital film preservation.

3.1 Digital: An Array of Hope

The field of archiving is broad and encompasses not only the study of the past but also technology, electromechanics, commerce and culture. The archiving process consists of the following steps: acquiring, examining, identifying, restoring, curating, preserving, disseminating and exhibiting film (FIAF 2009). Film preservation has a dual purpose: firstly, as a community archive documenting contemporary life and secondly, as a preservation measure to protect cultural and historical heritage (Pahari 2009). Digital technology has created an environment that has resulted in many old films rising from their graves, with producers now able to make profits by selling broadcast rights to television channels and over-the-top (OTT) platforms, illustrating the incentive to convert their decaying films into new digital assets (Česálková 2024). The celluloid tends to deteriorate, and nothing can stop it. While speaking about the need for digital technology in film archives, a curator and an academic of Manipur State Archive R5 (respondent 5) stated, “The film will decay even if we keep it in the ideal situation.” R2 (respondent 2), a film restoration expert, added to the discussion and explained that digital archiving makes more sense; it extends the life of film content and makes it more accessible remotely. Respondent 1 (R1), an archivist working in Germany and having experience working with NFAI said, “Digital copies can be used for access while the original can be kept in vaults safe.” Digital scans of films ensure their availability for future generations. Digital technology has made access to archival film more practical for research, exhibition and education.

The following themes were identified from the qualitative data analysis.

3.2 Why India Lost Its Films

In India, the loss is already occurring due to negligence in film preservation. R1 explained, “There was a delay in viewing film as art. Because the film is a document about a specific time in history, it was never considered as an archival item. Due to this delay, most of the Indian films were lost.” R2 claimed, “The preservation of Indian films faces significant challenges stemming from producer negligence.” In the formative years of film industry, there was a lack of recognition of the archival importance of film materials (Kumar 2013b). Unfortunately, by the time the NFAI was established, the opportunity to save a significant portion of these films had already elapsed (Kumar 2013a).

The absence of pre-independence consciousness regarding preservation in India can be attributed to the absence of dedicated preservation infrastructure during that era, coupled with a lack of interest or effort on the part of the British colonial government. A subsequent examination concerns the post-independence period, during which a significant number of films were produced, but few of which have withstood the test of time. An NFAI official R6 (respondent 6) believes that the responsibility for this inadequacy in film preservation lies with the producers, with the loss of cinematic art traceable to the widespread acceptance of films as mere commodities. From the above themes emerges a sub-theme that lists the relationship between film and art and commerce at the top.

3.3 Issues and Challenges in Digital Film Preservation

Digital archiving of film heritage has the potential to preserve what cannot be preserved. Still, archivists face formidable obstacles. Experts have openly acknowledged a variety of past and present challenges, the most significant of these issues being the perceived uncertainty of digital preservation. The subsequent discourse outlines the main problems that arise in this area, with the issues that Conrad (2012) identified with digital film preservation still present in analysis conducted a full decade later. Over the last decade, the film business has grown with the introduction of digital technologies, and daily developments have accelerated the pace of development of digital technologies. Yet, archivists continue to struggle with the long-term preservation of digital assets, a problem exacerbated by the complexity of the film medium.

The following subthemes in the form of issues arising from data analysis are not exclusive to those working in India’s moving-image archives; they affect archivists worldwide.