Thought I would mention one thing which hopefully you already know.
Occasionally the
question has come up why are we microfilming when we can do scanning? The
key difference
for me is that while scanning can provide access, it still remains an
electronic file and has to
be migrated for each new computer system. It is possible at some point
that it will not be
readable or usable if the software and computer systems change support.
For example, my
Microsoft Word images that I used with Word 95 and Word 2000 are no longer
readable or
supported by Word XP. All that clipart, etc. is useless to me now. Thus
there is a continuing
cost to support the electronic form. Also there is the problem of
quantity. We are presently
scanning photographs here in the library; we estimate that the final result,
for storage, will run
6-8 gigabyte of storage. Our large lbrary servers can handle only 4-6
gigabyte. And we continue
to get photographs. We've had to make arrangements to ship our data to a
state computer
center for libraries and then erase our files just to have a workable
system. What does a county
clerk or archives do? And there are rumblings at the state level about
charging a storage fee
for electronic data since they too have to buy equipment, arrange for
migration, etc.
I like scanned images for ease of access and use. I love microfilm for its
ease of storage, longevity,
etc. I actually have two microfilm readers, little portable old-timers,
that have few moving parts and
work just as well now as when the University bought them in 1967 or 1968.
In a pinch, I can use
these or even read film with the naked eye and a magnifying glass.
All of these issues do have hidden costs..migration, storage, and even
reader equipment.
Dean
Dean DeBolt
University Librarian
Special Collections/West Florida Archives
John C. Pace Library
University of West Florida
11000 University Parkway
Pensacola, FL 32514-5750
850-474-2213
850-474-3338 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: Archives & Archivists [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Bergeron, Paul
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 8:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Looking for recent cost comparison on microfilm vs. scanning
I am going to be part of a panel presentation, next week, discussing issues
that should be considered when making investments in electronic records
management technology, including document scanning.
Has anyone done a recent analysis on the cost of microfilming a single, 8
1/2" document page vs. scanning a single, 8 1/2" page?
Either doing it in-house (with your own staff and equipment) and/or
contracting the work out?
I recognize that there are a ton of variables here, but I'm looking to boil
this down to a small, understandable unit. Given that I have to cover this
topic in about a 15 minute presentation, I can't spend a lot of time on this
"comparison."
Off list response would be quite fine.
Thank you!
Paul R. Bergeron
City Clerk
229 Main Street
Nashua, NH 03060
Telephone: 603/589-3010
Fax: 603/589-3029
<http://www.gonashua.com/> http://www.gonashua.com/
A posting from the Archives & Archivists LISTSERV List sponsored by the
Society of American Archivists, www.archivists.org. For the terms of
participation, please refer to
http://www.archivists.org/listservs/arch_listserv_terms.asp.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send e-mail to [log in to unmask] In
body of message: SUB ARCHIVES firstname lastname *or*: UNSUB ARCHIVES To
post a message, send e-mail to [log in to unmask]
Or to do *anything* (and enjoy doing it!), use the web interface at
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/archives.html
Problems? Send e-mail to Robert F Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
