(snip)
> 1. Permanence: Is the data medium archival?
(snip)
 
Let us not forget more basic technologies such as the photograph.
The photographic record of more and more sites is being made with
color print film and supercenter processing.  Back when I walked five
miles barefoot to school (up hill both ways), slides were taken for
presentation, but the bulk of the documentation was archivally
processed black and white photographs (often with redundant
curation or spatial separation of prints from their negatives).
 
I've seen varying estimations of color print permanence, but
under GOOD storage conditions we are dealing with lifespans of
less than a century and sometimes as low as 20 years or
less!  The negatives and slides are somewhat better but come nowhere
close to a properly processed silver negative or print.  There are some
fairly stable, but expensive, color processes, but does anyone use them?
 
The purpose of an archival photo record is to insure the ability to
undertake future restudy of the excavation as well as the artifacts.
Are we ready to assume that our limited distribution reports are the
end-all of the scientific process?
 
Color prints, video site records, slides, xeroxed publications on
acidic papers, data packs, E files, flair pens, highlight pens on
illustrations, etc. all have their place.  But, what are our
responsibilities to the archaeological patrimony?