The Revolution Should Not Be Digitized–Put It on Microfilm Instead

By Eliza Strickland | December 1, 2010 11:49 am

hipster-catBy Colin Schultz

The siren song of digitization is one we are hardly even trying to resist. E-books are outselling hardcovers on Amazon, the Beatles sold over 2 million songs on iTunes in a week, and you can read 350-year-old scientific papers online. But why should we fight it? Digital media is cheap, it’s easy, and it’s clutter free.

But like all of the siren’s attempted seductions, digitization is an attractive tune with a twist. The convenience that digital storage offers now will more than likely be made up for in future headaches. So a pair of researchers recommend that we bring some analog back into our lives.

Steffen Schielke and Andreas Rauber are neither picky audiophiles nor hoodie-clad hipsters, they’re computer scientists, and they are worried about the long-term storage of all this data we’re collecting.

Magnetic tape, floppy disks, CDs and DVDs have all more-or-less come and gone in the last 80 years. While trying to find the equipment and expertise to actually use the different formats can be a burden, there are also issues with software, say Schielke and Rauber, the authors of a new study on the future of data archiving published in the International Journal of Electronic Governance. You may have even experienced this before. As Brien Posey recalls on the TechRepublic blog:

Fifteen years ago, I stored my archives on Zip disks. They were a good choice at the time because they were relatively inexpensive and you could fit a whopping 100 MB of data on a single disk.

Today, though, Zip disks are pretty much extinct. I still have my old Zip drive, but it connects to a PC via a parallel port. Like the Zip drives themselves, parallel ports are also extinct, so I can’t read the data from the Zip disks.

The problem really kicks in for people who are trying to maintain records for decades or longer, like governments or librarians. Every time a storage medium goes obsolete, the whole archive needs to be flipped over to a new format, taking time, money, and opening up room for errors.

Schielke and Rauber’s solution is to switch everything over to a format called microfilm, a 200-year-old technology which stores information as tiny images and can be read with nothing more than a good magnifying glass. Microfilm can last for over 500 years if it is stored properly, and using a barcode system allows error-free storage densities of around 14 kilobytes per image, say Schielke and Rauber. The information is easily re-digitized, saving us from the strained eyes and late nights previous generations experienced hunkered over microfilm at the library.

It’s more than a little ironic that one of the proposed solutions for our data storage woes might be solved by a technology that led us to embrace digitization with open arms (Hipster Kitty would be proud). But with the Library of Congress now archiving tweets and websites, I can’t help but worry about the historians of the future, lest they be crushed to death under a pile of microfilm in the Justin D. Bieber Wing of the National Twitter Archive.

Related Content:
Discoblog: Man Boots Memories From Brain Straight to Computer
80beats: “Story of Stuff” Crusade Takes on E-Waste and Planned Obsolescence
80beats: Self-Organizing Nanotech Could Store 250 DVDs on One Coin-Size Surface
DISCOVER: In the Race Between Optical and Magnetic Storage, We Win
DISCOVER: Think Tech One Hundred Movies on Just One Disk

Image: I Can Has Cheezburger?

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Technology Attacks!
  • ChH

    1. Seriously?
    2. Get a USB Zip drive to recover your old data.
    3. Put everything on hard drives, and copy from one set of hard drives to the next as hardware technology advances.
    4. “Every time a storage medium goes obsolete, the whole archive needs to be flipped over to a new format” – this conflates hardware media with software formatting.

  • Chris

    ChH, he was trying to make a point. Although right now we can find options to read zip disks, in a few decades, that might be impossible. In the lab where I work we came across some 8″ floppy disks from the early 1980s. I didn’t even know they made them that big. We still had some of the drives (don’t know if they work), but if we needed that data, who knows how to retrieve it? And we also had some cassette drives. Also some of the 3.5″ floppies had a different format than the 1.4 MB modern standard and the drives we had couldn’t read them. 20 years down the line, it may be impossible to find zip drive readers.

  • PJD

    National Twitter Archive….;))
    compares to the in-latin graffiti I saw carved in the walls of Dover Castle, and preserved for “all time” behind plexiglass. This really adds to history of our species? *snort*

  • Sam

    We duplicate data so much, it is hard to imagine that we will lose anything of real significance. Of course, if we were to looks Facebook’s secret archives, or Tweeter crap, I hardly think that historians will care 200 years from now.

  • badger

    From a records management point of view you would be amazed at how much stuff people loose over time if its not properly stored. And in relation to facebook and twitter they should defo be archived, as jenkinson points out who knows what historians will want to read in the future.

    Mircofilm all the way! We just recommended to a department we were working in to keep their mircofilm instead of transferin it to CD!

  • Kenny

    How do I put my digitised audio archive onto microfilm?!

    If your data is valuable enough you will transfer it over to a new digital medium before the old one is obsolete, and it’s a damn site easier to transfer in the digital format!

    I’m not saying it’s perfect, but it’s a step closer to perfection than audio tapes (in my case).

  • bazawitryn

    Decidedly sizeable and understandably maintained entanglement directory. If the positions your net locate can at the moment submit your install to our directory for free. do gazu!

  • Charles Cooke

    So, how do I get my genealogy papers on microfilm? and how much does it cost?

  • Charles Cooke

    I have 700 pages that I would like to have microfilmed, how much would that cost????


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


Quirky, funny, and surprising science news from the edge of the known universe.

See More

Collapse bottom bar