Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T09:24:36.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

In-Field Digital Photography and the Curation of Associated Records: Not All Prints Are Created Equal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2019

Michelle K. Knoll*
Affiliation:
Natural History Museum of Utah, University of Utah, 301 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84124, USA
A. Carver-Kubik
Affiliation:
Image Permanence Institute, Rochester Institute of Technology, 70 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester, NY 14623, USA
*
(mknoll@nhmu.utah.edu, corresponding author)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With the advent of commercially available digital cameras in the late 1990s resulting in the near-exclusion of analog photographic prints today, most archaeological repositories around the world have a mix of analog and digital photographic prints. That ratio is increasingly moving toward digital print processes, of which there are several types. To minimize the loss of image quality, collection managers must become familiar with the unique curation challenges of photographic prints from digitally created images. Likewise, creators of digital content must be aware that choices made when selecting a print process for reposit will have a direct effect on image and print permanence. Site photographs are critical evidence of archaeological activity, and so the preservation of digital prints is in the interest, and is the responsibility, of collection managers and archaeologists alike.

Con la llegada de las cámaras digitales comerciales a finales de los años noventa, se eliminó casi por completo la impresión fotográfica analógica o tradicional. En el caso de los depósitos arqueológicos alrededor del mundo, probablemente se cuenta ya con un conjunto de impresiones fotográficas analógicas y digitales. Lo cierto es que los procesos de impresión digital van en aumento, por lo que es importante conocer los diversos procesos. Los administradores de colecciones deben aprender a enfrentarse a los desafíos de conservación únicos de las impresiones fotográficas de imágenes digitales para minimizar la pérdida de calidad de imagen. Del mismo modo, los creadores de contenido digital deben ser conscientes en la selección del proceso de impresión ya que este tendrá un efecto directo en la permanencia de la imagen y la impresión. Las fotografías de sitio son evidencia crítica de la actividad arqueológica. Por lo tanto, la conservación de las impresiones digitales es de interés y responsabilidad, tanto de los administradores de colecciones como de los arqueólogos.

Information

Type
How to Series
Copyright
Copyright 2019 © Society for American Archaeology 
Figure 0

TABLE 1. Digital Print Processes Most Commonly Found in Archaeological Repositories.

Figure 1

FIGURE 1. Four different digital print processes of the same image. Notice the variations in image quality. Images courtesy of the Image Permanence Institute.

Figure 2

FIGURE 2. 10x magnification (loupe): chromogenic and D2T2 prints are continuous in tone, inkjet prints are made up of very small dots, and electrophotographic prints are made up of large dots. Images courtesy of the Image Permanence Institute.

Figure 3

FIGURE 3. 50x magnification (pocket microscope): dye clouds are visible in chromogenic prints, D2T2 prints are very diffuse with a slight grid pattern, inkjet dots are clearly visible, and electrophotographic dots are large and dusty, indicating it is a dry toner electrophotographic print. Images courtesy of the Image Permanence Institute.

Figure 4

TABLE 2. Temperature and Relative Humidity Recommendations for Born-Digital Prints.

Figure 5

FIGURE 4. Inkjet prints showing examples of (a) the original print and (b) after fading and hue shift. Images courtesy of the Image Permanence Institute.

Figure 6

FIGURE 5. Inkjet prints showing examples of (a) the original print and (b) after dye migration. Images courtesy of the Image Permanence Institute.