6 Jun
2005
6 Jun
'05
8:20 a.m.
You can reap a lot of benefits from the SAA (Society of American
Archivists) Which I've been a member of for the last two years.
You can tap into a lot of professional details on the handling of
materials, storage, cleaning and restoration of various surfaces and
materials, even understandings into properties of inks, papers, tape and
other materials to understand long term breakdown, acidity and other
information. So if you really want to get a lot of good solid
answers, join up and you'll start getting the monthly newsletters and
the network contact information, plus they send out catalogs on
storage/restoration materials.
I've got close to 40,000 documents on file here in my office from Atari
as well as original pencil drawn blueprints, so I'm trying to take
archival of these items very seriously.
Curt
Vintage Computer Festival wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005, Dave Dunfield wrote:
The problem has been in assuming that by making or not making
modifications to something that you are doing the right thing. I doubt
many if any people here are trained in conservation practices, and I'm not
claiming I am, but I do understand the issues. Suggesting the use of
solvents on any material has long term effects that, if not understood,
can do permanent damage. Rich's solution of deciding to purchase a
separate face panel was in fact the correct and proper solution in this
case.
Yes, thats how I understood his postings, which is why I offered what I
considered to be helpful suggestions to that end.
There are different ways to look at this. First of all, is Rich a new
user of the piece, or is he a conservator? I would say he's more the
former than the latter: he fully intends to continue using this item. Of
course, as a collector he's sensitive to preservation issues, but he also
wanted the piece to look like it was when new out of pride of ownership.
By changing out the front panel, the piece is no longer "original", but
original is merely a refernce marker. It could have ceased being
"original" as soon as the previous owner made even the smallest
modification, such as plugging in a third party interface card.
One can assume perhaps that Rich was sensitive to the issue of altering
the history of the piece by removing the ink, or perhaps he didn't feel
that would be an adequate restoration and opted for a replacement panel.
In either case he would be modyifying the machine, therefore altering its
history. The less destructive method of alteration is to replace the
front panel as he opted. However, noting this alteration is up to Rich.
He may not consider himself a conservator or collector but a hobbyist
wanting to restore his new found fancy to "factory" condition. As I
mentioned before, whatever he decides to do is his perogative.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.3 - Release Date: 6/6/2005
You never
defined "original condition". This could mean the condition it
was in when it left the factory, or the condition it was in when it left
the nth generation owner.
At any rate, this is all getting a bit nazi. If Rich wanted to saw it in
half so he could display the innards then that would be his perogative.
I'm sorry, but I really don't know what your problem is with my postings.
Rich's asking on the list how to fix the IMSAI logo seemed like enough
evidence to me that he wants it visible like when it left the factory and
not blacked-out as done by the previous owner (he would not have had to
ask how to keep it blacked out as it was already done).
Are you suggesting that I am a Nazi for giving my opinion that there is merit
in keeping the original artwork if it is reasonably possible instead of
replacing it (which he had indicated that he was considering).
At no time on any of my postings did I attempt to
coerce Rich into doing
anything (or not doing anything) with his machine that he didn't want to
do - I simply gave my suggestions and opinions in response to his inquiry.
I was unaware that this would cause a problem. How does one determine
what suggestions and opinions are considered acceptable to this list?
This might sound rude but it's part common sense, part logic, and mostly
understanding how real conservation work is done. If you really want to
know what is generally considered acceptable based on time-tested research
and study then enroll yourself in a museum studies program.
Obviously any cleanup should be attempted with great
care, and if it's not
going to work, then by all means get the replacement, and keep the original
in a safe place.... but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at least investigate
restoring the original first.
Everything has a story. You have to decide if you are going to continue
writing the story where the last guy left off by removing the ink or
considering it complete and leaving the computer as is. Rich decided to
continue the story.
Just recently, a thread went by where opinions
were given as to the merit
of keeping original screws in machine - I don't recall anyone bashing the
person with that option
Do you have a filter on Tony's messages? He completely lambasted Jules
for replacing the screws on a power supply, which I did not consider to be
a major or irreversible modification. This is the same issue. Rich is
replacing the panel which is reversible, and should he ever want to
demonstrate the condition in which he received the unit he can replace the
new panel with the old.
- how is it different to discuss the options in
replacing or not replacing front panel artwork? ... In other words, what
did I do to incur the "Wrath of Sellam"? (hey, we could make a movie with
that for a title!)
It wasn't directed at you in particular but at the tendency of people in
general to voice their opinions which are clearly either wrong or
uninformed, and then coming off the heels of the Screws Debate it just
seemed a bit overwhelming. My must everything be open to argument all the
time here? Especially when we're debating issues that have already been
argued and resolved many times over?