In Our Care, Part 1

This is the first post of a two-part series I wrote while working as a Digitization Technician at the Digital Production Unit of the Oregon State University Special Collections & Archives Research Center (OSU SCARC). This post was originally posted on August 8, 2018, on the SCARC blog. Content has been modified here.

Getting started with film preservation: A rite of passage

After attending the FIAF Film Preservation & Restoration School Latin America in 2017, I couldn’t wait to preserve and improve access to the audiovisual materials at the Oregon State University Special Collections & Archives Research Center (SCARC). While I waited more than a year, the opportunity finally arrived for me to be in charge of better preserving the “In Our Care” film series of the KOAC-TV Films Collection.

The KOAC TV Films Collection

The KOAC TV Films collection contains 96 acetate 16mm film reels produced by or for the KOAC TV station of Corvallis between 1947 and 1975. In the past few months, the Library has been considering digitizing “In Our Care,” one of the series from this collection that contains 35 reels from 1959 documenting, as read on the collection description, “Oregon’s prisons, hospitals, and schools for the handicapped and delinquent.” An inspection of the films was due in order to know their features and physical condition and to prepare them for eventual digitization. Besides inspecting, I also cleaned, repaired, and rehoused the films.

The inspection expectations

Knowing some features beforehand, this examination was expected to help me identify and document technical aspects, content, and physical condition in further detail.

From the technical standpoint, I expected to determine whether the films were positive, negative, or reversal; color or black and white; silent or sound. For sound films, I expected to identify whether they had magnetic or optical sound and if optical, whether they had a variable area or variable density sound recording. Also, I would try to identify whether the elements were camera originals, duplicates, or prints.

From the damage and decay standpoint, I expected to ascertain physical damages and decay to detect films at risk and segregate them to avoid contamination. I was especially interested in looking for signs of “vinegar syndrome” and mold, which appear as a reaction to humidity and can cause irreversible damage to the films. There can be also mechanical damage — that is, broken perforations, scratches, tears — caused by negligent handling and projection, faulty equipment, and deficient repairs.

The inspection process and findings

For inspection, I used low-tech tools available at the Library: a hand-cranked rewind bench with split reels and a lightbox with a magnifying loupe (10x) that I use to inspect photographic negatives before digitization.

Inspecting with a loupe.

Technical characteristics

Inspecting the film cans: These films were stored on boxes, horizontally, and vertically arranged. Most cans were of metal, and some were rusty (Fig. 1). Other few were of polypropylene. Some cans contained just one film, while others two or three; some films were properly stored on cores, while others on reels (Fig. 2). Reels are intended for film projection, not for long-term preservation, so those last should be transferred to cores.

Rusty metal film can (Fig. 1); Film stored on a metal reel (Fig. 2).

Inspecting the films on the rewinder: After viewing several feet of each film, both with a naked eye and using the loupe, I discovered this series contains a myriad of negative, positive, and reversal elements, with a predominance of positives; B/W and color elements, with a predominance of B/W; and silent and sound elements. Among the films carrying images only, some had their sound elements stored separately. Some films had been composed combining B/W with color, positives with reversals, and even silent with sound. Some examples:

Negative Films: Countdown leader on B/W Gevaert film stock; “KOAC TV” title card on BW Kodak film stock; Detail of BW Kinescope.

Positive and reversal films: B/W positive on Dupont film stock; B/W duplicate on reversal film stock (note the perforations from previous film generations printed on the edges); Ansco color reversal; Kodachrome color reversal.

Silent and sound films: Silent film (may have a sound record stored separately); Unilateral variable area soundtrack; Variable density soundtrack.

During the inspection, I paid special attention to the film edges to differentiate between camera originals, duplicates, and prints. For instance, one can easily distinguish a positive from a reversal (both have positive images) because positives have clear edges while reversals have black edges. Camera negatives have an equal density on the edges and in-between the image frames, while duplicates tend to have a lavender cast to it, and may have perforations from previous film generations printed on the edges. This way I was able to determine this series contains originals, duplicates, and prints on Kodak, Eastman, Dupont, Gevaert, and Ansco film stocks, being kinescopes and workprints the predominant elements in the collection.

Kinescopes

Kinescopes are filmed recordings of live television broadcasts, produced by the studios in the early times of broadcast TV to preserve programming for rebroadcast by other stations. Kines’s were most commonly distributed in 16mm B/W film for its lower cost, and given its poor image quality, they were largely replaced by videotapes after the 1970s.

Detail of a B/W kinescope negative, and as it would be seen as a positive image, with perceivable scan lines.

Kines’s were largely purged during the transition to VHS, so finding them, even among a TV film collection, is valuable. Given they were recorded from a TV monitor, usual technical problems of kinescopes, such as scan lines, or a dark bar across the image, are distinctive features that can be very helpful when it comes to identifying them.

Detail of B/W kinescope negative, and as it would be seen as a positive image, with a perceivable black band across the image.

Workprints

More unusual to find, since they used to be discarded after serving their purpose, are workprints. Workprints are rough prints made from the original negative that is used by editors to make rough-cuts before intervening in the original negative. Workprints can also be made from reversal film to avoid damaging the very original elements during the editing process. In this last case, a copy from the reversal film is used as a workprint. Being heavily and careless handled, is usual for workprints to have tape splices between most scenes, scratches, fingerprints, dirt, tears, markings for future edits, fades, and black or blank leaders throughout the print. Some examples:

Damage and decay

With a myriad of elements, comes a myriad of damages. The images below illustrate some common, and singular, damages I found in this series:

Warped edge, possibly caused by faulty equipment; Dirty splices (it is also appreciable what seems to be color fading on the film edges); Orange dots on BW film (I have seen photos of similar damage on B/W microfilm, known as “redox blemishes” or localized zones of silver corrosion); A tear from the perforation to the image.

Distorted blank leaders at the beginning of the films, especially those not secured with tape, and old tape and glue residue were other pretty usual findings.

Documentation

Documenting the information gathered during the inspection of the films is a key part of the process because it assists archivists to make informed decisions and track any changes in the condition of the films over time. After inspecting each film, I recorded my findings on a spreadsheet in the cloud and also made photographic records of each element, some of which I’ve used in this article.

What is next?

Stay tuned for the second part of this series, where I share how the films were dry-cleaned, repaired, transferred to cores, and rehoused onto polypropylene cans.