[1] With respect to analog or non-digital materials, artifacts are determined to have singular research or archival value if they possess qualities and characteristics that make them the only acceptable form for long-term preservation.
[2] These qualities and characteristics are commonly referred to as the item's intrinsic value and form the basis upon which digital artifactual value is currently evaluated.
Similar to paper-based objects in many respects, artifactual value for images typically takes into account artistic value, age, authorial prestige, significant provenance, and institutional priorities.
The Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) has stated that printed texts and other paper-based manuscripts, when considered as objects, are imbued with meaning distilled from a general set of understandings inherent to these conventions:[1] These conventions are important to consider because they help to describe the physical and even metaphysical relationship between a document's content and its physical manifestation.
The idea of fixity with regard to printed materials, for example, is largely predicated on the notion that an object has been recorded on a relatively stable medium.
However, uniqueness in the physical, paper-based sense does not translate to a digital realm in which immaterial objects are subject to theoretically infinite levels of reproduction and dissemination.
Furthermore, because the tools used to generate and access digital objects have historically evolved quite rapidly, issues of playback obsolescence, incapability, data loss, and broken pathways to information have changed traditional ideas of fixity and stability.
Michael J. Giarlo and Ronald Jantz, only two of many, have posited a list of methods for establishing digital intrinsic value by way of careful metadata generation and records maintenance.
"[1] Keeping the original is always the best solution for libraries and especially archives but in the case of libraries where an artifact is not rare or used infrequently there must be a barometer that is developed to help "balance functionality with actual use in order to help decide when digital surrogates that provide most of the functionality of originals are acceptable.
"[1] A professional in the field of Library and Information Science (LIS) would almost certainly not argue that a digital surrogate could replace a rare object.
However, in the case of a rare object that is falling into poor shape due to heavy use a digital surrogate could be extremely useful in reducing the wear and in the long run aid in preserving the artifact.
The digital surrogate can aid in preservation and helps increase access but they can lose valuable evidential value.
"The major risk posed by digital surrogates is the loss of evidential value due to the destruction of evidence as to the context and circumstances of their origin.
"[7] The text and content of a digital document is the focus and importance whereas the presentational platform can be modified or changed completely.
'The simple thing to do would be to provide the best reproduction possible within our means and hope for approval...the original will be distorted by the process.
Librarians need to be aware of the implications of enhancing one informational element while obscuring another, whatever the profile of these changes and the technical reasons for them may be.
Computing professional competition is straining the scholarly consideration for digital work in the library profession.
Valuable digital resources, which will bring prestige to the institutions that create and maintain them, will be those that can support scholarship without any loss of the benefits of working with the originals.
Perhaps since the professional idea to digitize as a legitimate method of archiving is still new, examining the plan of the DDB sheds light on this notion.
"Initially the thinking on future strategies was led by the idea of giving priority to safeguarding the content of a digital publication; however, keeping the 'original look and feel' of a document is now also considered to be an important aspect.
It is deemed as important because its creation has established a new level within the digital medium that could develop into the norm by the end of this decade.
"[13] Here is a comment made in the article concerning the longevity of a news source and how it has both potential and danger in being totally unavailable once the information has passed its initial interest level: "Since the "Daily Nightly" blog is not archived anywhere other than the MSNBC site, there is no guarantee that future generations will have access to these posts, considered by traditional media to be insightful and helpful for understanding part of the news process.
"[13] The author describes possible answers to archiving blogs; however, the points align themselves with artifactual value concerns within this medium.
The premise is structured around truth, validity and authenticity along with proper linking methods to accredited sources so that this form of communication and information does not go undetected.
[17] The Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR)[18] has also contributed guidelines for establishing a digital object's artifactual value.
Rather, the CLIR 1998 report suggests that preserving a digital artifact should mean retaining the "functionality, look, and feel of the original "object".