Journal of Film Preservation - FIAF

appropriate in the sound archive community, this policy presents
problems for an international organization.
FIAT/IFTA is a little different because its members mainly represent
commercial or state-funded broadcasting organizations. Although
concerned with the preservation of television programs, discussions are
often centered on access to collections and better ways of making
materials available to program makers. FIAT/IFTA has more financial
resources than FIAF or IASA and does an excellent job training
broadcasting archive staff. It used to alternate Congresses and training
workshops, an idea that I thought FIAF should adopt, but in recent
years has held both in the same year, but in different locations. Both
IASA and FIAT/IFTA have joined FIAF in Joint Technical Symposiums, the
first of which was held here in Stockholm in 1983. Usually these have
been a great success. In 2000, IASA had a joint Congress with
SEAPAVAA, the first time an international archival organization has held
a joint meeting with a regional archival organization. This may become
a pattern for the future.
Although archivists don’t consciously choose to support the activities
of regional associations rather than those of FIAF, geographical
proximity, language and common concerns lead them in this direction.
It is not surprising therefore that the rise of these groups in the
nineties parallels the discussions about membership and the future of
FIAF in the Federation.
There are other significant changes. Film archivists now spend much of
their time raising funds or defending government subventions. They
have also become more concerned with health and safety issues,
employees’ rights, staff training and technical research. There is now
much more oversight and, for instance, travel expenditure is directly
related to the funds spent on preservation and access. Archivists have
to demonstrate concretely the value of conference attendance. They
can attend several national or regional events for the same cost as an
international one. Also, like a good restaurant, a film archive works best
when the curator stays close to home. Major problems surface quickly
and they need to be on hand to defend the archives’ territory or ward
off predators. This often means they no longer have the time or the
money to undertake a significant role in the Federation.
FIAF is also no longer the sole source of technical information. The
studios now appreciate the commercial appeal of selected restorations.
The laboratories, which compete to serve both industry and archives,
have therefore acquired equipment that is more sophisticated and
found ways of increasing preservation quality. In the States they
provide financial, and in-kind, support to AMIA. Laboratories would
never consider giving concrete support to FIAF because the Federation
doesn’t welcome them as members. In my opinion, any organization
that is concerned with film preservation, supports the FIAF ‘Code of
Ethics” and maintains the technical standards to which the Federation
aspires but, incidentally, has never documented, should be welcome as
members.
Commercial organizations can only use their membership for financial
gain if other members let them. A real Open Forum where members
5 Journal of Film Preservation / 67 / 2004