Once the Pictures are Digitized, Everything Old is New Again
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
Ellen Carter - Buenos Aires 1929 |
Almost every day at breakfast in bed (18 years, daily with
Rosemary) there is something in my hard copy New York Times that shakes me up
and immediately installs on me a thinking cap.
I write “almost every day” because on Saturdays it also
happens after dinner. It is around 8PM every Saturday that we get the Sunday NY
Times. This past Saturday/ Sunday (November 11, 2018) I was really jolted.
The paper had a special section (in a smaller format the size of their book
review) called Past Tense California – History Through the Eyes of the New York Times. It had lovely old and more recent photographs in black and white of
California. On the last page I read this:
“Once the pictures are digitized, everything old is new
again.”
Jeff Roth, Researcher & Archive Caretaker - The New
York Times
On page 2 of the main section of the paper I found one of
my fave daily columns called Inside TheTimes – The Story Behind The Story. The
feature this time around was The Times’s (note that ‘s!) Capsule of History. You
can read that here. A photograph taken in 1948 shows the photo library and I
immediately note the presence of metal filing cabinets identical to the ones
behind me in my oficina as I write this. Well not quite identical. Mine stack
four drawers and the one at the Times five. I don’t have six million
photographs. My 7 filing cabinets hold my output from 1989 until the very
present.
The New York Times photo library in 1948 when it was located in the art department |
Because I also shoot digital I never fill my storage
cards (I shoot jpgs not RAW). I download them into my computer and an outside
backup. But (and this is important) I store my storage cards with my photo
files, all in alphabetical order. I suspect I may have 250 thousand negatives,
slides, transparencies and many photographs.
As I read that beautiful statement by Jeff Roth I
wondered with what photograph from all the ones I have that somehow would
portray “old is new again.”
The photograph came quickly. Some many years ago (perhaps
1967) my uncle Leo Mahdjubian (who was not my uncle in reality but we in the
Waterhouse-Hayward family adored him. He often helped us with loans that were
infrequenly paid back) gave me this photograph of my paternal grandmother Ellen
Carter that was taken in 1929.
In our family she has always been Ellen Carter and never
Ellen Waterhouse-Hayward. She was married to my grandfather Harry
Waterhouse-Hayward.
Why was this? Well it seems that Harry, Ellen and son
Harry traveled from their native Manchester to Buenos Aires in 1901. Buenos
Aires records show us that Harry senior and Ellen got married not long after in
Buenos Aires. Thus so my father stated (in rumours as he never told me this
directly) Harry Jr. was a bastard son and thus did not have the right to have
the middle name Waterhouse due to the male firstborn. My father then was the son who was born in
wedlock and passed the fine middle name to yours truly. As for Harry Jr. he
taught me how to make Colman’s Mustard. It was most important to add sugar.
I would like to finish here to point out if you do not
read the above The Times’s Capsule History that with a Google partnership the
NY Times is digitizing all that material.
This has a crucial connection with Vancouver (an opposite
crucial one). A few months ago the Vancouver Sun donated 2 million negatives to
the Vancouver Archives. Many of those negatives are colour negatives shot in
the 80s. Colour negative is an intrinsically unstable material that needs
refrigeration.
Now consider that you might need a couple of minutes to
scan one negative. By my calculations you would need 33333.333 hours to do the
job. Will anybody at the Vancouver Archives take on that project? Is there
enough space there for refrigeration?
Now there really is no comparison between the NY Times
and the Vancouver Sun. By donating the 2 million negatives the Vancouver Sun
has simply passed the buck.
And consider that since I have been blogging from January
2006 some of my blogs have links to articles in the Vancouver Sun. Most are
gone. My question now is how the digital output (both in written articles and
accompanying photographs) of the current Vancouver Sun may be handled.
In these days we have “lest we forget” in our minds. Just
a few days after if we are thinking of our city heritage I would say “we are
sure to forget”.
There will be nothing there to help us remember.