Studio-Archive Joint Restoration Project Guidelines
Supporting Document C:
Public-Private Cooperation Task Force (published August 1994)
Increasingly studios and public archives are recognizing the value of
working together to preserve American films. An initiative of special promise
is the joint studio-archive restoration project, pioneered by Sony Pictures
Entertainment with the International Museum of Photography and Film at George
Eastman House, the Library of Congress, the Museum of Modern Art, and the UCLA
Film and Television Archive. In this type of partnership, a studio and
archive join forces to produce high-quality preservation materials of major
studio-owned titles. Such projects differ from standard preservation in that
they usually entail extensive research, planning, and specialized laboratory
work to restore films to their original state. The Film Foundation encourages
these arrangements, finding that they further the studios' proprietary
interests, the archives' cultural mission, and the public's study and
enjoyment.
Here is how such voluntary arrangements typically work. The studio
contributes funding for laboratory costs; the archive contributes the time and
skills of its preservation staff. The studio provides access to its
materials; the archive evaluates these elements and searches for additional
source materials in noncommercial custody. Both partners work together to
prioritize titles for restoration and to carry out the process.
Each partner gains from the collaboration. The studio obtains:
(1) detailed and confidential written evaluations on the quality and condition
of existing film elements, (2) information on relevant existing materials, and
(3) new high-quality preprint elements of key titles. The archive acquires
(1) preprint of the same works for safekeeping for future generations,
(2) prints for use in research and public programs, and (3) a role in projects
having a broad popular impact. Both profit from building a wider circle of
working relationships and the cross-fertilization of ideas and techniques.
It is important to note that archives are as eager as studios to see
preserved films re-enter the marketplace and become available to the public
through theatrical exhibition and ancillary distribution. Significant
American motion pictures restored through public-private ventures include The
Guns of Navarone (1961), On the Waterfront (1954), I've Always Loved You
(1946), Phantom of the Opera (1943), His Girl Friday (1940), Mr. Smith Goes to
Washington (1939), Holiday (1938), The Plainsman (1936), Shanghai Express
(1932), early sound shorts by the Vitaphone Company (1927-29), Noah's Ark
(1929), and Tess of the Storm Country (1914). In addition the studios and
archives have collaborated in promoting screenings of studio-preserved titles
such as The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957), Gone with the Wind (1939), and
The Wizard of Oz (1939), and thus furthering public interest in preservation
and increasing the audience for restored films.
Why Prepare Voluntary Guidelines?
The Public-Private Cooperation Task Force, appointed by the Librarian of
Congress to advise on the national film preservation plan, has developed the
following voluntary guidelines to assist interested studios and archives in
developing constructive partnerships. The guidelines draw upon task force
members' experiences over the past decade in joint restoration ventures and
summarize key features contributing to successful efforts. The guidelines
suggest an informal framework for designing mutually beneficial collaborations
and can be applied to single projects or ongoing programs.
Benefits of Cooperative Restoration Projects
By pooling resources and expertise to preserve major studio-owned
titles, a studio and a public archive can produce high-quality preservation
materials, adding to a film's long-term commercial value and supporting the
role of archives in safeguarding America's film heritage.
The studio specifically:
- Obtains advice in determining which films are of considerable
cultural interest to the American film-viewing public and
worth the investment of a full-scale restoration.
- Develops a clear framework for preservation planning and
prioritization.
- Obtains detailed research on key titles and evaluations of the
preservation quality of film materials in its library.
- Ensures that the best-available materials--from both commercial
and public collections--are used in the restoration process.
- Creates high-quality preprint materials for studio use
as well as additional preservation materials safeguarded in public archives
that can be consulted by the studio should the need arise.
- Realizes commercial benefits from the exploitation of newly
restored titles in exhibition and ancillary markets.
The archive specifically:
- Obtains high-quality preprint materials to safeguard the
title for future generations.
- Obtains high-quality film prints for use in research and in public
programs.
- Contributes to projects having a broad popular impact, and
thus promotes the archives' film preservation work and cultural
mission.
Both partners:
- Develop a wider circle of working relationships and trade ideas
and preservation techniques.
Key Features of Successful Projects
- A. The studio and archive would jointly select titles for
preservation evaluation. The studio, in consultation and
agreement with the archive, would select and prioritize titles
from its library for the purpose of determining their preservation
needs. Prime candidates for early inclusion would be titles that
the studio already suspects require restoration.
- B. The archive would evaluate the preservation needs of each title.
The archive would inspect and evaluate the preservation status of
each selected title. This process would involve two steps:
- 1. Physical inspection. The archive would inspect the studio's
existing preservation elements and other appropriate
materials to determine their quality (picture and sound) and
condition (scratches, tears, splices, signs of
deterioration, etc.). Many titles may be found to be
adequately protected and need no further work. Others,
however, may require upgrading or even restoration to insure
proper preservation.
- 2. Written report. The archive would prepare and submit to the
studio a confidential written report on each title
inspected. The report would include:
- Evaluation information on the picture and sound
quality and physical condition.
- Recommendation on whether new preprint materials
should be prepared. If new materials are recommended,
the report also would include: (a) a description of
the improvements that could be obtained and (b) a
budget estimating the cost of the project.
- C. The studio would authorize preservation work. The studio would
approve or reject each recommended project on a title-by-title
basis. No further work--beyond inspection and evaluation--would
begin without studio authorization.
- D. The studio and archive would collaborate on the preparation of
materials and the supervision of laboratory work. Once a project
is approved, studio and archive personnel would coordinate the
restoration effort. Typically, this work would include:
determining which elements to use in the restoration process;
assembling, repairing, and preparing the footage for printing;
coordinating laboratory processing; and doing quality control. In
some cases, the archive holds in its own collection film materials
that are useful in the preservation process. The archive may
borrow additional materials from other public archives, in the
United States and abroad, or from private sources. The
laboratories used for each project would be jointly selected by
the studio and the archive.
- E. The studio and archive would each receive new preprint and
print materials at the time of preservation. For each
upgraded or restored title, the studio would order the
preprint and print materials needed for its own operations.
In addition, the archive would receive 35mm preprint elements
(picture and sound) and an answer print for permanent addition
to its preservation collection. The archive and studio would
jointly determine the types of elements to be produced for the
archive. The studio would be guaranteed limited access to the
archive's materials, as determined by mutual agreement.
The archive also would receive a 35mm viewing print for in-house
screening and loan to other cultural institutions (museums,
universities, festivals, archives, etc.). All loans would be
subject to prior written approval by the studio.
- F. The studio would underwrite the cost of all laboratory work
and contribute to the cost of the archive's services.
Financial arrangements would vary from program to program and
depend on the particular features of the project and internal
factors unique to each studio and archive. Typically, the
studio would cover the costs for laboratory services on those
titles approved for upgrade or restoration, and contribute to
the archive's direct costs for inspection, evaluation and
restoration services.
The studio would control the annual cost of the program by the
number of titles selected and the types of elements prepared.
These costs would be estimated in the budgets prepared by the
archive for each title prior to studio approval of restoration
work.
- G. The studio and archive representatives would meet on a regular
basis to monitor the work and share preservation information.
This might involve one-on-one meetings between the studio and
archive, or, should the studio prefer, larger sessions in which
the studio meets with several public archive partners to share
information on joint projects and preservation issues.
Drafted by the Public-Private Cooperation Task Force:
Mary Lea Bandy (Museum of Modern Art), Raffaele Donato
(The Film Foundation), Douglas Gomery (University of
Maryland), William Humphrey (Sony Pictures
Entertainment), Scott Martin (Paramount Pictures), Brian
O'Doherty (National Endowment for the Arts), Edward
Richmond (UCLA Film and Television Archive).
National Film Preservation Board -
Motion Picture & Television Reading
Room
Library of Congress Home Page
Library of Congress
Library of Congress Help Desk
(09/07/99)
|
