This past week I participated in the classic archives debate…
Rectifying best practice with what is possible in a real archive.
Background:
My department is interested in including already digitized from analog audio files in our digital collection. These audio files were digitized three years ago according to best practice and the standards of the archive’s field. Recently the National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage issued new standards for digitizing audio files. In addition, the listening quality of many of the digital files is far less than perfect.
Central Questions:
Should we the archive’s department re-digitize these numerous audio files to comply with the new set of standards issues by the LOC?
If we decide to re-digitize them- should we complete this work in-house or seek out an outside firm to do the job?
Should we accept the less than perfect quality of the digital copies we already have and work to enhance their quality using software?
How do either of those courses of action impact establishing a set work flow for digitizing and making widely available audio files in the future to add to our digital collection?
Final Thoughts
As someone just starting to get her feet wet in the archival field, I was struck and persuaded by both sets of arguments. Re-digitizing the audio files to adhere to current standard makes sense. In addition to which this course of action should help us establish a work flow for dealing with and making widely available audio files in the future.
However, we are a small shop- as so many archive’s departments are- and maybe cannot afford to spend the time and person- power it would take to re-digitize these files when somewhat suitable copies already exist.
In the LIS classroom we learn best practice and the ideal solution to a given problem, but of course it’s not until any of us get out in the “real” world and work in a setting where the ideal isn’t possible that we must find different if less than perfect solutions.