Interview with Nan Rubin, project director of the Preserving Public Television project, Page 4
You have spoken of moving to a preservation system that preserves discrete elements of programs, such as opening credits, program segments, underwriter announcements and closing credits. Broadcasts would then be assembled by using the elements as needed. This would result in there no longer being a "definitive version" of a program. What are the advantages of moving to such a system? What are the implications of not having definitive versions of programs?
Dr. Howard Besser wrote in "The Moving Image," fall 2001, "…Preservationists need to … engage in some fundamental paradigm shifts in how they view the preservation process… [one] key shift will be … from saving finished works as a whole to an asset-management approach that deals both with component parts of works and with ancillary materials that relate to the work."
In the last few years, our entire business has changed in exactly that manner that Howard described – television production has become a process of asset management of many component parts, and the end products can be any number of variations depending on whom it is for.
In many ways, the system has been forced into this position whether it likes it or not. In theory, the advantages are that elements can be used over and over again in many different ways; updates and edits can be easily accomplished without having to edit the entire program; versions for different markets can be easily and efficiently produced, etc.
The implications, though, are that programs become a "moving target" with no single version that can be called "final." If all you have are program segments or elements, it becomes critical to keep documentation of the production accessible, so that it could be reconstructed or reassembled, or so that elements can be switch out, whenever necessary.
Could you briefly describe the Universal Preservation Format and any milestones that have been achieved in its creation so far?
I'm not the best person to explain this; it is really the area of expertise of Dave MacCarn, chief technologist at WGBH. Basically, the concept is that both the program "essence," that is, the digital file with the visual information, and the program "metadata" file with all the descriptive and technical information, are packaged together with a "wrapper" file that allows the information to be decoded, regardless of the system reading it, yet keeps the files tied together.
There are several technical schema working on developing such a solution. Dave started writing one himself a few years ago but didn't have the funding to complete it. Since then, the concept has become more accepted among technologists and fellow travelers, and we hope to update Dave's original work to finish the design taking into account recent improvements in the field.
Is there anything else you would like to discuss?
Our project is based, in part, on adopting an asset management system for storing and accessing our moving-image materials. This is turning out to be more difficult and complex than we had planned. At the same time, we were also unprepared for learning about the Library of Congress's National Audio-Visual Conservation Center and its implications for the future of television holdings at the Library.
We are now making adjustments to accommodate both these developments!
