To the comments made b y Dwight and others, let me add these.

First, there is no point in discussing a purely-digital option for
permanent records. Most IT people aren't in the same universe as we are
when discussing time spans--for them, "long term" means 5 years or the
next major version of MS Windows, whichever comes first (Jesse Wilkins
being one of the very, very few exceptions).

Second, I am profoundly skeptical (I'm trying to be nice) about the
viability of "digital preservation" methods. IMNSHO, the stuff will
disappear after a few decades when the resource requirements of on-going
migration (starting with simply giving a damn) become apparent.

Third, in any and all conversions, you absolutely MUST commit your own
resources to quality-controlling, to some degree, the work performed. A
vendor who knows you are quality-controlling his work will do it more
carefully; that's just human nature. So, if you're scanning-to-film, you
have to QC the scanned images (and the index) AND you have to QC the
first-generation silver-gelatin microfilm. This is part of the argument
in favor of film-to-scan (you only need to QC the microfilm; QC the
digital images to secure your investment).

Fourth, if you choose to produce microfilm from the digital images in
order to have a reliable permanent record, be aware the quality of the
digital images greatly affects the quality of the microfilm. 200 dpi
bitonal just ain't gonna produce good quality microfilm. This is a huge
problem if you want to re-scan the images at a subsequent time. You may
be better off microfilming first and then scanning the microfilm images,
providing that you can find a service provider who will deliver
good-quality microfilm.

Best regards.

Fred
===================================================================
Frederic J. Grevin
Deputy Commissioner and Chief Information Officer
The City of New York,
Department of Records
Email: [log in to unmask]
Land phone: 212.788.8615
Cell phone: 347.436.5360
Fax:  212.788.8614
www.nyc.gov/records
31 Chambers Street
New York, NY 10007
USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of WALLIS Dwight D
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 13:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Student records questions--seeking help

Karen, my recommendation would be to look at digitization of the hard
copy, then transfer of the images to security microfilm for long term
storage, then recycling of the hard copy after appropriate quality
inspections. That way you can take advantage of the usage capabilities
of digitized documents; reduce your hard copy storage costs; and
maintain the records in a preservation format (silver microfilm) that,
properly produced and stored, have a 500 year life expectancy. This
format can also be used for future re-scanning if the electronic files
get corrupted or become obsolete. This type of service is readily
available throughout the country. Another option is to simply microfilm
the hard copy, and destroy the hard copy once filmed. This requires the
maintenance of reader/scanners for access - if the usage rate is
relatively high, this may present challenges. In my experience, the cost
of straight hard copy microfilming vs. scanning/microfilming is not that
significant for records of any volume.

Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution and Stores
(FREDS)
1620 S.E. 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
Phone: (503)988-3741
Fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of
the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]