Talk:Film Archive Forum

Untitled
"It has particular interest in the preservation of nitrate film, acetate film, videotape and digital media; the training of archivists, acquisitions policy, standards for archives, copyright, co-operation with film laboratories, and contacts with foreign archives."

This is simply not true. I was a member for this group from June 2001 to November 2006, during which time its work was almost exclusively focused on political lobbying to secure increased public funding for the English regional film archives. During this time it undertook no initiatives (which I can remember) related to the specific technical practices of preservation, copyright, co-operation with labs and contacts with foreign archives. Indeed, I was regularly criticised, sometimes quite heavily, by members of FAF's executive for suggesting that it did become involved in these areas. For example, when, towards the end of my time on FAF, I pointed out that there was only one lab in the UK which is capable of carrying out high quality colour photochemical duplication work on problematic archival elements and that the absence of such a lab in the public sector jeopardised the UK's preservation infrastructure, the chairman told me in no uncertain terms that it was not FAF's place to 'interfere' with the provision of commercial services. During my time at FAF, it did not undertake a single collaborative project with an archive outside the UK that I can recall (indeed, there is no logical reason for it to do so - there are already international representative bodies for film archives and archivists, e.g. AMIA, FIAF and SEPAVAA, with well-established work in this area).

I therefore suggest that this sentence be replaced with:

"The principal function of FAF is to provide publicity, advocacy and political lobbying on behalf of the public sector moving image archives in the United Kingdom, with the main aim of securing a level of public funding for the sector which safeguards its core activities and long-term sustainability." --LDGE 21:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)