Sonneck Society for American Music
Bulletin, Volume XXIV, no. 3 (Fall 1998)
Anatomy of a Preservation Project: Microfilming an Archival Collection
David Peter Coppen, SABREPP
[Editor's Note: This article is a continuation of "Anatomy of a Preservation Project: The Sousa and
Clarke Archives at UIUC," The SSAM Bulletin 24/2 (Summer 1998): 33-40.]
On 31 March 1997 the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Commission on Preservation and Access
announced approval of funding for a fifteen-month preservation microfilming project on behalf of the collections.
During the course of the project, ninety-six cubic feet of archival manuscriopt music and related materials
were reformated through preservation microfilming, and archival quality negatives and positive use
copies were created for 120 photographs. At the completion of the project, copies of the microfilm
reformatted materials will be available to institutions and individuals for purchase.
The preservation of documents can take either of two forms: employment of techniques to halt physical
deterioration and to repoair damage; or the reformatting of the intellectual content of a document
by one of three means: photocopying onto acid-free or acid-neutral paper; employing optical disc
technology (e.g., digitization); or selecting preservation microfilming. THe latter is the focus of
the NEH-sponsored Sousa Archives for Band Research Preservation project (SABREPP).
A microform, whether microfiche or microfilm, is a photographic medium bearing images greatly reduced
in size that require magnification for reading. On archival microiflm, the reproduction consists
of microimages in a silver-gelatin emulsion on a polyester film base. When housed, stored, and used in
accordance with established standards and recommended practices, the film is expected to remain usable
for up to 500 years. In additon, the term preservation, when applied to a microformat implies that the
information has been ordered coherently and reproduced onto stable archival quality film and that efforts
to recreate a microreproduction of that material need never again be undertaken.
Many have inquied as to whether digitization of the Sousa and Clarke collections might be more effective.
One must concede that digitization appears an attractive alternative, embodying the alluring glamour of
cutting-edge technology. Digital images to not deteriorate with use, they can be captured quickly and
inexpensively, and they can be transmitted at a high rate of speed over a network, thereby enhancing
access by geographical distant users. The fact is, however, that the digital medium cannot at present
be truly considered archival based on the rapid rechnological evolution and therefore limited life-span of
most commonly available information media.
Microfilm relies on a simple and stable technology, with a lens and a light source being the sole
requirements for access. (When all the power has run out, scholars will still be able to read the
Sousa manuscripts by holding the film up to the sun and looking through magnifying glass.) The medium
has survived and experienced increasing use since its inception in the 1920s, when Eastman Kodak
manufactured the first Recordak microfilm reader. Furthermore, an American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) code governs archival microfilming quality, and the Research Libraries Group (RPG) in the
United States has issued guidelines for microfilming projects to ensure the observance of strict
procedural standards and quality control.
A microfilming project is comprised of several steps: physical preparation, intellectual control,
post-filming inspection, and cataloguing. Physical preparation demands a page-by-page review of each
document and the gathering of data for building finding aids or catalogues. The SABREPP staff devised a
workform to record data reflecting categories for score and parts identification, physical (as well
as historical) details (e.g., dates, signatures of copyists and other band members), and caricatures,
poetry, and personal opinions. The workform is also used to record the instrumentation of each work
using a photocopied reproduction of the original music library inventory sheet used by the Sousa Band librarian.
Preparation also requires minor repairs, the relaxation and straightening of folded and wrinkled leaves,
and the insertion of instructional flags to alert the filming agent of any irregularities or situations
requiring special attention.
Post-filming inspection requires checking for bibliographic completeness and for adherence to technical
standards. Inspection of each print master negative and service positive copy of film is carried out
with the aid of a loupe, ligh box, densitometer, and microfilm reader. In the interest of
protecting the film, SABREPP personnel wear gloves when handling the reels of film during this
process.
Finally, SABREPP personnal plan to issue a project-specific catalogue detailing the microfilmed portion
of the SABRE collection, thereby providing a published sumation of the project and its results.
SABREPP personnel have invested countless hours in pre-filming examination and ordering of the collection
to ensure the cleanest and most accurate reformatting of hte manuscript component of the Sousa legacy.
Updated 1/05/99