The Material History of a Nitrate Film, Part 2: Preservation - Text 2
This print is now a matrix, the only substitute for the lost original camera negatives. Archives call it a ‘master positive’ for this reason, even though it was originally not meant to play such an important role. This is where curatorial judgement makes its first appearance in the material history of the film. Should the copy not be unique, its archival denomination would not necessarily change; as this is the nitrate print of a silent film – a rare object by definition – it is likely that the archive would treat it as a matrix anyway.
Until the early 2000s, it was customary to allow the exhibition of an archival print as long as there was a film preservation element – that is, a negative – derived from the matrix. Should the projection print be ruined, another could be made. Reliant upon this very sensible theory, museums and archives kept showing the same copies until they became so damaged as to be almost unusable. Once a common practice among collecting institutions, this rule of thumb can no longer be applied without a careful assessment of its implications. Whether in colour or black and white, an archival projection print is never easy to replace. Even if a preservation negative is available or its whereabouts are known, there is no guarantee that a new print will be as good as the old one. Moreover, making a new print is indeed a very expensive business, and there is no abundance of funds for film archives and museums.
Photochemical duplication process
The museum that now owns print 36 in our fictional case study chose to follow the photochemical path described in the next diagram. The film is cleaned, repaired, and put in cold storage. As soon as financial resources allow it, the print is taken to a laboratory and a negative element (of the same format, when possible or required by the nature of the project) is produced. Duplication by photographic means is achieved with contact printing (the positive and the negative are continuously run through the printer) or step printing (each frame of the film is separately exposed in front of the duplicating element). The latter method is much slower, but it is far more accurate, especially when the source material is heavily damaged or shrunken.
