Volume 29, Issue 1

When I was asked to write an article about how mass-deacidification fits into a library's preservation program, to reflect particularly on the relationship of deacidification to reformatting decisions (which today I assume means using digital technology), I thought that this would either be a very short article or possibly a confusing one. I will leave it to the reader to make their final judgment, but I do want to state at the outset that I will not be arguing that a choice must be made to either deacidify or reformat collections. My assumption is that using the most appropriate preservation option does not preclude choosing to both deacidify and to reformat the same item.

Amigos Library Services, a not-for-profit membership organization providing support and services to libraries and cultural institutions throughout the southwestern United States, has been working since 1994 to answer member needs for education and information on digital imaging. Aided by an initial grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1998-99, and continuing support until 2001, the Amigos Imaging Service is developing a continuing education model for imaging, focusing on hands-on, practical information.

When Dr. John L. Ferguson, director of the Arkansas History Commission, met with the archivists in late February, 1999, to ask if we had any ideas for an Arkansas Natural and Cultural Resources Council (ANCRC) grant project, hope sprang anew in my heart. The previous September the Arkansas State Library had sponsored my attendance at “Planning for Digitization.” Held at the Denver Public Library by the Western Council of Libraries, this workshop showcased digital possibilities through examining digital technology, existing digital projects and funding sources. Most impressive were the tours of the Denver Public Library's (DPL) Western History Project. Sitting at a computer workstation, I was able to search for photographs, then view high resolution digital images captured from original prints and negatives by the library's digital lab (also included as part of the tour). Best of all, I could view corresponding MARC records created by researchers headed by a photograph cataloging specialist.

The claim is often made that JPEG encoders vary a great deal in their abilities to produce small, acceptable quality JPEG files. It has often been asserted that PhotoShop produces poor quality, “bloated” JPEGs when compared with PaintShop Pro, ImageOptimizer, or even PhotoShop's poor web-cousin ImageReady. For web use, where excessive download times may mean the difference between someone spending serious time browsing a site or hitting their back button in exasperation, this is an important issue. And having spent many hours building up a website that has been perhaps generously referred to as a “graphics-pig”, I myself had an interest in finding out if these aims were true. So I did some research, wrote an analysis code and performed a number of experiments from which emerged some useful results.

The goal of this project report, sponsored by The National Endowment for the Humanities, Division of Preservation and Access, is “to offer some guidance to libraries, archives, and museums in their efforts to convert photographic collections to digital form.” To date, there are no standards for measuring the quality of digital images created from photographs. Therefore, this report is primarily concerned with developing tools to measure image quality. Other technical and managerial issues related to digital imaging projects in general are also addressed.

This publication serves a guide to the issues and challenges associated with the preservation of electronic records, regardless of the kind media on which they are stored. The intended audience is anyone involved in the creation, delivery, or preservation of electronic records. The report focuses on administrative and managerial issues rather than specific technical solutions.