trashcanland – screen caps from your 80s childhood

Those of who enjoy the retro video curation of Network Awesome or the VHS mining of Everything Is Terrible, but don’t want to commit whole minutes to watching whole clips might like a tumblr I just stumbed on to, trashcanland, which strips minds the impacted VHS landscape to unearth the best 1/30 of the second.

The site is the work of DJ Daniel J. Cashman who seems to acquire a lot of VHS tapes. Then he takes screenshots and posts them to his tumblr. Sounds simple, but the secret is in the editing. Just you see, when you’re on page 48 and you’re still clicking to dig deeper, you’ll know you’re stuck.

Not everything is a still VHS screen cap. Some are also animated GIFs, and other found detritus.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

LoC Digitizing and Preserving the Nation’s Motion Picture Legacy

Who knew the Library of Congress has a robotic system for the automated digitization of VHS and 3/4″ Umatic videocassettes? I sure didn’t, but I’m glad I took a last-minute opportunity yesterday to learn about the LoC’s film and video digitization and preservation facilities and efforts as part of an event on the Northwestern campus (where I work) called Screen Cultures: A Symposium on Moving Image Collections and Historiography.

I was only able to attend one panel featuring NYU historian Dan Streible, organizer of the Orphan Film Symposium, and the LoC’s head of the Moving Image Section of the Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division, Mike Mashon. Streible discussed how preserved and digitized film materials helped him research his book Fight Pictures: A History of Boxing and Early Cinema. He emphasized how having access to higher-quality and resolution copies reveals details that help construct a more accurate history. Streible also noted that the existence of multiple copies in different formats tells stories about the intended purpose and audience for a film. For instance a 16mm copy of what was originally 35mm film may indicate that it was distributed for small-venue or even home screenings.

I was reminded about the existence of paper prints of early motion pictures that were made prior to 1912 when copyright law didn’t cover movies. In effect, creating these prints was a way for early studios to hack the copyright system, since only works that could be fixed on paper could be copyrighted. Thus, studios submitted these huge rolls of paper contact prints of their films to the Library of Congress so they would enjoy copyright protection.

In his presentation Mike Mashon showed off the digitizing and preservation resources housed at the new Packard Campus of the National Audio-Visual Conservation Center in Culpepper, VA. There they have a specialized Kinetta Scanner (PDF: “Preserving Early Motion Picture History with the Kinetta Archival Scanner“) that digitizes the paper prints at a rate of 4 frames per second. Before this device was available, preservation and duplication had to be done by hand, photographing the prints frame-by-frame. Amazingly, the digitized paper prints can then be output back to optical film.

The LoC is digitizing all of their video and film assets using a lossless version of the Motion JPEG2000 codec. Unlike common video codecs like DV, AVCHD, H.264 and DVCProHD, the one the LoC is using throws away no image data, with only a moderate amount of lossless compression in order to shrink the data size. This means the LoC is retaining as much video quality as their digitizing equipment can capture, but it also means they’re storing a massive quantity of data. According to Mashon their data center is able to archive 8 petabytes on tape, with a copy on spinning discs for regular access.

In addition to the full quality MJPEG2000 files, the LoC is creating so-called “access” files for use by the public in MPEG2 (the same codec in DVDs). They’re moving to creating MPEG-4 files, which are more bandwidth efficient.

It was reassuring to learn that despite all this digitization the LoC plans on retaining and preserving original films, even ones on volatile nitrate stock, as long as they remain usable. However, when asked about retaining videotapes, Mashon acknowledged that space will become an issue and holding onto magnetic tape will be a lesser priority. One very practical reason for this is that videotape degrades more quickly than film or paper, often becoming unplayable in as little as twenty years.

The LoC makes digitized materials available for viewing in its reading room on Capitol Hill. I learned that members of the public can request materials to be digitized for viewing. If the material is in the public domain or licensed for distribution you can even take a copy home, provided you bring media suitable for copying it.

I can only imagine the cost of this enormous preservation effort, but I’m very glad that such investment is being made in retaining these valuable documents of our historical and cultural legacy.

I Think I Must Admit that Laserdisc Is Dead

I have the sinking feeling that I might be forced to define my terms….

My pal Aj alerted me to this boingboing post about the news that Pioneer is ending production of laserdisc players. The funny thing is, I honestly didn’t think Pioneer was still making laserdisc players.

That’s not a joke. Although I’ve been a fan of the format, and new players are still available, I was under the impression that whatever you can buy are just backstock from the early 2000s.

I’ve had a laserdisc player since 1993, and currently have a collection of around 100 discs. Similarly to my vinyl collection, I cleaned up buying used discs around ’97-’98 when DVD hit the market and the early adopter videophiles dumped their LD collections for the next big thing. In that crucial transition period there was quite a bit of debate amongst hardcore videophiles and home theater enthusiasts–a tiny population compared to today–about the comparative benefits and deficits of DVDs versus laserdisc.

Perhaps the most infamous salvo in that particular battle came from indie filmmaker Kevin Smith in the original commentary track to the Criterion laserdisc release of his second film, “Chasing Amy.” (Yes, commentary tracks first debuted on laserdiscs taking advantage of their discrete analog and digital audio tracks, and Criterion got it’s start on laserdisc.) Smith begins his commentary–recorded around 1997–with, “Fuck DVD.” Words I’m sure he had to live down in just a few year.

Of course we now know that DVD soundly trounced laserdisc, which never grew past being a small cult format to begin with. While a lot of the late 90s debate sounded a lot like the analog vs. digital debate of the LP vs. CD argument, I think it’s safe to say that the relative charms of analog video in the form of laserdisc were not as alluring nor palpable as with vinyl records. I could go into a long dissertation on how that relates to the differences between audio and video recording (which is different than analog motion picture film), but I’ll spare you.

Unlike VHS, cassettes, LPs and photographic film, I think laserdisc is really dead. While the machines that record and play those other formats may be less widely available than in their heyday, you can still buy blank media and new player/recorders. With laserdisc it’s been a good eight years or so since a new laserdisc release has been commercially available. Furthermore, it was never a consumer-recordable format, so no recording your own discs. Without a commercially available program on laserdisc, the player isn’t much use.

Now, there were thousand of movies and other programs released on laserdisc during the format’s 20+ year run, and there are still some films on laserdisc that have yet to see the light on DVD (though the number is dwindling). So if you have a decent laserdisc collection and a player, the format’s not dead to you.

But in the broader view, laserdisc must be declared a dead format . We won’t be seeing any new laserdisc releases, and I’d be surprised if there were any pressing plants still left in operation. Now there will be no more new players, when even enthusiasts like me thought they weren’t being made anyway.
Read more »

Film’s not dead, either

Oh, no. I’m not ready to give up on the anti-planned-obsolescence rant just yet…

The world of photography has been much less chaotic than the worlds of audio and video over the last century. There’s really only been one significant technological disruption–from film to digital. Yes, there have been multiple formats of film over the century, but they mostly boil down to differences in size. But it is nevertheless the case that you can still buy new film for the vast majority of film cameras made since 1909.

Digital, of course, was supposed to be the death knell of film, but things didn’t quite work out that way. Instead, digital photography sparked new public interested in photography as an art and hobby, which ended up leading a lot of folks back to film. Like the vinyl LP vs. CD debate, there are plenty of passionate photographers ready to argue that one or the other is inherently superior. As one of those people who never took a strong interest in photography until getting my first digital camera, my perspective is that is has less to do with better than different–qualitatively different.

Still, the film business isn’t at all like it was a decade ago, when digital cameras were $1000+ investments yielding the kind of resolution you now get from a $10 keychain digicam from the drugstore. But there still is a film business.

The Rochester, NY Democrat and Chronicle recently published a story about a local business you might have heard of, that’s still hanging on to the film business: Kodak. The article quotes Kodak’s marketing manager for professional film, Scott R. DiSabato:

“We call it the ‘and’ world,” DiSabato said. “We know the professional use will be significant enough the next couple years, we’ll get the investment (into those film lines) back.”

In fact, Kodak introduced a new color film formulation this past year, a time when film still makes up a third of the company’s gross revenue.

Again, I’m not arguing against technological innovation. I have nothing against digital cameras, and I own several. I also own a pile of film cameras (that I picked up for next to nothing). I’m just pointing out again that obsolescence is a business process and a social process. That is, there’s nothing inherent in film that should make it obsolete, so much as that the combination of the need to find new products to sell, the fact that some of these new products actually do offer new and significant benefits and a social shift to embrace that new technology.

The social element is important–Kodak is still making and selling film because people are buying it and using it. They’re finding value in it, whether it’s due to nostalgia, the belief that it is superior to digital, an affinity for film’s aesthetics, or simply because using disposable film cameras when you need them makes more sense than dumping several hundred bucks into a digital cam.

If people choose not to accept the supposed inevitability of obsolescence in significant numbers, then we can interfere with that process. Moreso than with VHS videotape, film has a certain unavoidable market dynamic — someone has to manufacture the film stock and developing chemicals if the medium is to stay alive. I’m certain that the medium can survive even with smaller “boutique” manufacturing, but film’s not something the vast majority of people are going to be able to make at home. So a certain critical mass of buyers and users has to be maintained to keep film viable as a non-obsolete, if niche, technology.

Videotape, on the other hand, is reuseable. Certainly if all manufacture were to stop today eventually the tapes in use now would eventually wear out. But the true death of the medium would come more slowly than if film were to be no longer manufactured.

As (electronic and chemical) media makers we are still dependent on a consumer economy, but that doesn’t mean we are utterly subject to its whims, nor without feedback mechanism. We do not have to buy up every new so-called innovation because it’s supposed to be better, nor do we have to abandon a technique, method, medium or tool just because the industry, press or blogosphere now declares it dead. In fact, fantastic personal innovation, ingenuity and creativity can be sparked in the continued embrace, or reembrace of a reportedly obsolete technology. Whether it’s audiocassette, VHS, film, vinyl LP, laserdisc, minidsc, 8-track or daguerreotype, it’s not dead for you until you don’t want to use it any longer.

Thanks to Ken Rockwell, the most entertaining photography writer on the internet, for pointing me to the Kodak article. For more about practical, technological and qualitative strengths of film, read Ken’s essay, “Why We Love Film.”

Rumors of VHS’s Death Are Greatly Exaggerated

Oh, planned obsolescence, you are such an insistent mistress.

It seems like the end of the year news hole combined with the imminent digital TV transition (which does not necessarily mean the end of analog TV…) has sparked additional interest in the press ringing the funeral bells for that most ubiquitous yet unloved video medium, the VHS videocassette. The renewed attentiveness was triggered by a recent LA Times article about the last remaining supplier of pre-recorded VHS tapes to retail stores. The discount supplier tells Times reporter Geoff Boucher,

Photo credit: the waving cat / flickr

“It’s dead, this is it, this is the last Christmas, without a doubt,” said Kugler, 34, a Burbank businessman. “I was the last one buying VHS and the last one selling it, and I’m done. Anything left in warehouse we’ll just give away or throw away.”

Boucher notes that the last major Hollywood release on VHS was 2006′s “The History of Violence.” However, that does not mean it’s the last VHS release, since there are certainly direct-to-video, corporate, promotional and independent releases still being churned out on videocassettes. And that’s just US market. What about VHS in less developed nations especially India and Latin America, where the push to new formats goes slower because there’s that much less disposible income?

I don’t have a beef with Boucher’s article so much as the second-order press and blogosphere reaction that seizes upon the “VHS is dead” meme rather than the more specific point that the production and distribution of pre-recorded VHS movies are ending. My problem is two-fold. First, I can’t help but think the minor panic-inducing tone of the overall reportage is timed and focused in order to help drive DVD and Blu-Ray sales, especially amongst the digital disc holdouts who up to now have been satisfied with their VHS collection.

Second, it’s overly simplistic to say that VHS is dead just because prerecorded tapes will become more scarce in 2009. One of the most disruptive aspects of home videocassette technology is the fact that it’s recordable; with a VHS VCR you don’t have to simply rely on a steady stream of commercially prerecorded content. I’m willing to bet that millions of VHS VCRs are still in service across the US doing just that — recording someone’s favorite movie on TV or timeshifting a favorite TV program.

Sure, millions of people have shifted to using DVD recorders or DVRs for that purpose, or are time-shifting by watching things online. But that population is still a small percentage of the whole, characterized by having the income necessary to afford these more expensive technologies, combined with the knowledge, interest and will to use them. VHS is dead for a certain class of people, but not the whole country.

Nevertheless, it is true, as one TV report said, that “VHS’ days appear numbered. ” But then, that’s been true pretty much since the first year of DVD, when that technology went on to set records for fast large-scale adoption. Even then the writing was on the wall, just as it is with nearly every single consumer electronics technology ever introduced. Do not doubt that from the time when the first VHS recorder rolled off the assembly line that the electronics giants didn’t have dozens of designs for its successor on the drawing board. It just took until 1997 for DVD to strike the right combination of size, convenience, image quality and price.

Obsolescence is not a natural process, but one planned right into the consumer economy. Now, I’m not arguing against innovations and the succession of technologies with better, more attractive qualities and greater utility. I certainly barely watch VHS tapes myself, and mostly rely on my DVR and on DVDs. So VHS is not a vibrant everyday technology in my household. Yet, that does not mean VHS is useless or dead.

Of course this is the sunset for VHS, but I question the rush to scare people into buying new technologies. Certainly, my recommendation to anyone who has VHS tapes that have irreplaceable stuff on them to consider copying them to DVD, whether it’s a home video or an out-of-print movie (you don’t even need your own DVD recorder — most chain drug stores in the US will do it for you). But that’s as much because of the inevitable slow degradation of magnetic media as it is the eventual death of VHS. I’d make the same recommendation if your precious memories are on DVD — though copying a rare commercially recorded disc will prove more difficult due to digital rights management.

Some justification for declaring VHS’ death rests upon the analog TV transition happening in February. And while it is true that your old VHS workhorse will not be able to record the new digital signals directly, it’s not counted out. The first reason why is that if you still have an analog TV and are using a cable converter box or one of the digital converter boxes for over-the-air broadcasts, then your VCR should still be able to record their digital output. Furthermore, even new digital TVs still have analog inputs for VCRs, DVD players, game consoles and the like, and will continue to have them for a long time. So getting a new flat-panel TV doesn’t mean you can’t still watch your VHS tapes.

Let’s remember that vinyl records and cassettes were declared dead in the early 90s when CDs finally became predominant. And yet, here we are in 2009 and we’re reading about the minor resurgence of vinyl, and you can still buy new books on tape. Sure, you’re not going to find the newest rock albums on new cassette, and new vinyl LPs are still made in tiny numbers compared to CDs. Yet that does not qualify a format as “dead.”

It’s arguable that the LP resurgence is driven both by nostalgia and a hardcore minority that has contended that vinyl sounds better and therefore stuck with the format through the CD era. Cassettes also have some nostalgic allure for many, especially when it comes to memories of mix tapes, while having a much tinier fanbase who cling to the format for its sheer fidelity. I think it’s too early to tell if there will be gathering nostalgia for the lowly VHS videotape in the same way. I’m not sure people have the same emotional attachments to recordings of TV shows and movies that they have for music… but that could just be me.

If you’re wanting to rent or buy the newest Hollywood movie releases then you’re going to need a DVD player — but then, just about anyone with that desire in the US already knows that and has made the appropriate decision. If you’ve still got a VHS VCR and are happily using it there’s no need to panic. Now might not be a bad time to pick up a spare VCR if you can afford it, nor is it a bad time to consider making DVD backups of anything that’s really valuable to you.

But make no mistake, there’s no indication that you won’t be able to buy a new VCR or blank VHS taps for quite some time to come. Unlike Polaroid film or other single-manufacturer technologies, VHS was licensed far and wide. As long as there’s a buck to be made making and selling recorders and tapes, they’ll be out there.

Like cassettes and vinyl records, VHS tapes and VCRs will continue to live alongside the technologies that are supposed to replace them. Going out of favor does not mean obsolete.

Read more »

Watch Those VHS Tapes!

It was only ten years ago when DVD players cost over 500 bucks. And it seems like only yesterday that people were trampling each other in Wal-Mart on Black Friday to buy up $25 DVD players.

At this point we’ve probably all taken for granted the inevitable obsolescence of the VHS video tape. Yet, how many of us have shelves or closets full of tapes? Movies we never bought on DVD (or still aren’t available), stuff we taped off TV, home videos or maybe even tapes that have still gone unwatched.

Now we have one more reason to get ourselves in gear to go through those tapes and see what’s worth keeping, watching or preserving. JVC, the inventor of VHS, has confirmed that it has quit making stand-alone VHS VCRs. While there are still many VCRs left in the supply-chain, when they’re gone, they’re gone. As goes JVC, likely that’s the way the rest of the industry goes.

Nevertheless, with millions, if not billions, of tapes out there in the world, it’s probably a little premature to sound the final death knell for VHS. While stand-alone VHS VCRs that do nothing but play and record VHS are disappearing, JVC–along with several other manufacturers–is still making combo units that combine a DVD player or recorder with the VHS VCR.

Still, I wonder how long until we start seeing a dwindling number of these combo units on store shelves. it doesn’t look like BluRay is ready to take of quite like DVD did nearly a decade ago, but it’s fair to say that DVD is now not far from the place VHS was at the turn of the century, when VCRs dropped under $50 and tapes became bargain-bin items.

The point here is to see the writing on the wall and take steps to evaluate and preserve your VHS collection. That can mean stockpiling VCRs for the time when finding a working player gets more difficult, or–perhaps more efficiently–copying your favorite or irreplaceable tapes over to DVD-R.

If your favorite tapes are recorded off TV or in a camcorder you’ll have no problems making the copy using a VHS/DVD-R combo deck. However, if your favorite VHS tape is a commercially produced program your combo deck will balk at making the copy, thanks to Macrovision and the DMCA — even if that program isn’t otherwise available on DVD.

You can find so-called “video stabilizers” online that pretty effectively remove the macrovision copy protection from the analog VHS signal to record to DVD. But to use them you have to have a standalone VHS deck and DVD recorder, not a combo unit. Although, you could use two combo units, playing from one unit’s VHS deck to the other’s DVD recorder.

Another option would be to kick-start the latent VHS fan movement. It seems like plenty of forgotten technologies, from 8-track tapes to 78 records, so why not VHS? As the most popular analog video format you’d think that there’s got to be some underdog passion out there for it, whether due to forgotten cult classics only available on tape, or appreciation for its retro analog charms. Invite friends over to watch movies taped of late-night cable in the 1980s, or home videos from the early 90s.

Or maybe it’s time for all-VHS pirate TV when the analog turnoff happens in February.