1. An Update on Harvard Library’s Video Preservation Service Lamont Forum Room 11 September, 2015 David Ackerman, Abigail Bordeaux and Andrea Goethals

2. Today 1.Project Context (Andrea) 2.Media Obsolescence (Dave) 3.Video Analysis (Andrea) 4.Video Development (Abigail) 5.AV Materials Working Group (Dave) 6.Media Preservation Services (Dave) 7.Timing (Andrea) 8.Q&A

3. PROJECT CONTEXT Andrea

4. Media Preservation Services Digital Preservation Services Library Technology Services OrganizationallyWithin HL Preservation Services Within HUIT ServicesMedia (audio, video, film) restoration and reformatting, DRS depositing, consultations, specifications for and liaison to external vendors DRS oversight and management, monitor and maintain usability of DRS content, represent user preservation needs, consultations, guidelines Plan, develop, maintain library technology; provide training and support; data and reporting services; project consultations Relation to DRSDepositor, AV format expert Business ownerTechnology owner

5. DRS “Support” Format allowed in at least one DRS “content model” Repository tools “know” the format Usable now (e.g. through delivery services) Preservation staff reasonably certain it can be made usable on an ongoing basis via interventions

6. Formats Supported ICC JP2 TargtsWeb Harv. JPEGXMLPCDESRI WFs GZIPOpa- que TIFFTextGIFRAAIFFWAVSMILZIPPDF Email 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015

7. DRS Format Composition by File Count (~61 Million Files )

8. DRS Format Composition by Size (~185 TB per Copy )

9. Born Digital Formats in Harvard Libraries Number of Libraries (out of 21 that answered) Already have Will have in 3 years Source: HL Preservation Needs Assessment (2013)

10. DRS Format Requests (2004 -) Chart last updated: 7/2015 (69 requests)

11. Format Support Gap Arts. DBsSW ICC Video PDF Email SHP JP2 TargtsMore Audio Web Harv. Data sets XLS Disk Imgs JPEGXMLPCDESRI WFs Vect- or GZIPOpa- que Word PPT EPUBPyth. NBs TIFFTextGIFRAAIFFWAVSMILZIPPDFDNGCAD3D News.Email 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015

12. 2008: Stop-Gap Solution “Opaque objects and containers” Any format, BUT... – Only bit-level preservation – No delivery – Very coarse description – Less attention by preservation staff Moderate uptake - < 20,000 Opaque containers

13. Adding Format Support – Old Workflow All analysis & development done in-house – by existing staff – concurrently with other projects / operations – intermittently (requiring re-familiarization) Sometimes stalled by lack of expertise Ad-hoc, undocumented process

14. New Fast-Tracking Workflow 3 year project enabled by Arcadia Formats: – video – word processing formats – CAD (2D and 3D) – disk images – video image sequences – RAW camera images Goal: create a faster format support workflow that can be repeated New process working with consultants

15. MEDIA OBSOLESCENCE Dave

16. Legacy Media ( Mechanical )

17. Legacy Media ( Magnetic )

18. Legacy Media ( Optical )

19. Legacy Media Failure Mode Examples

20. Media Degradation “Degradation is well observed by custodians of media collections although only partly understood due to the scarcity of scientific data in this area.” http://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdfhttp://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdf p33

21. Media Obsolescence “Obsolescence has long been a concern, but has risen to the forefront in the last five years due to the accelerating loss of technologies supporting various formats.” http://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdfhttp://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdf p33

22. “All audio and video documents are machine readable formats … equipment has a major influence on the integrity and life expectancy of the carriers. As a matter of principle, only the most advanced equipment of the latest generation that provides the gentlest of handling should be used to replay carriers. This equipment must fully comply with historical format parameters.” Schüller, Dietrich. Audio and Video Carriers: Feb 2008. http://www.tape-online.net/docs/audio_and_video_carriers.pdf Rendering Media

23. Risk of Loss of Content Catastrophic failure of a recording from degradation so that no content is recoverable Partial failure from degradation so that only parts of content are recoverable Diminishment from degradation so that content is recoverable but at lesser quality Inability to optimally reproduce, or reproduce at all, a recording due to unavailability of playback machines, spare parts, repair expertise, or playback expertise Inability to preserve collections because it has become prohibitively expensive due to the extreme scarcity of playback machines and technical playback expertise http://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdfhttp://www.indiana.edu/~medpres/documents/iub_media_preservation_survey_FINALwww.pdf p33

24. Window of Opportunity “Studies have concluded that many analog audio recordings must be digitized within the next 15 to 20 years—before sound carrier degradation and the challenges of acquiring and maintaining playback equipment make the success of these efforts too expensive or unattainable.” Library of Congress National Recording Preservation Plan (P 7): December 2012. http://www.loc.gov/rr/record/nrpb/PLAN%20pdf.pdf

25. SAVE Survey Snapshot from Aug. 2014

26. Harvard Collections

27. VIDEO ANALYSIS – FORMATS, METADATA & TOOLS Andrea

28. Analysis Workflow 1.Divide up analysis responsibilities (in-house, consultants) 2.Determine format analysis criteria 3.Analyze formats 4.Create format profiles 5.Determine preservation strategy 6.Analyze metadata 7.Design DRS content model 8.Analyze tools

29. Video – Format Criteria Generic criteria, prioritized – Very important (ex: Dependency on a single organization or company) – 9 criteria – Somewhat important (ex: standardized) – 9 criteria – Not very important (ex: descriptive metadata support) – 10 criteria Format-specific – 7 criteria, examples: – Ability to encode in true lossless compression – Max resolution

30. Video – Format Matrix ( Partial View )

31. Video Preservation Strategy Prefer several formats as archival – uncompressed, JPEG 2000, MPEG-2 and DV (for DV tape) – provide a video reformatting service for these Accept a few popular proprietary formats but expect to fast-track migrations for them – DNxHD, ProRes Few wrapper formats (QT, MXF) One delivery format (H.264)

32. Video – Metadata Analysis Technical metadata – EBU Core 1.5 (aligns well with AES-60, structure mirrors MediaInfo’s output) Source metadata – A revised UTVideoSrc (native suitability to physical media, right amount of detail) Process history – A revised reVTMD (specific, simple, sufficient) Future work: descriptive metadata

33. Video – DRS Content Model VIDEO OBJECT = 1 Object Descriptor 1..n Video Files 0..n Video Files VIDEO OBJECT = 1 Object Descriptor 1..n Video Files 0..n Video Files 1 metadata file and 1 or more derivative video files HAS_SOURCE

34. VIDEO OBJECT VIDEO EDIT DECISION LIST OBJECT DOUBLE SYSTEM AUDIO OBJECT DOUBLE SYSTEM AUDIO OBJECT CLOSED CAPTION DATA OBJECT SUBTITLE DATA OBJECT POSTER FRAME OBJECT DISK IMAGE OBJECT HAS_DOCUMENTATION HAS_LARGER_CONTEXT HAS_SUPPLEMENT

35. Ex. – Video – Tool Analysis Incorporate MediaInfo into FITS (fitstool.info) Make FITS track-aware

36. VIDEO DEVELOPMENT - ROADMAP Abigail

37. Development Timeline Jan 2015July 2015 Video developer joins LTS Development for Release 1: single video file plus optional derivatives  Deposit via Batch Builder  Manage via Web Admin  Deliver through Streaming Delivery Service Jan 2016 Q3 FY16 Video release 1

38. Development Timeline Jan 2016July 2016 Development for Release 2:  Multiple files and playlists  Enhancements to caption support  Delivery enhancements Jan 2017 Q3 FY16 Video release 1 Q1 FY17 Video release 2 Additional development (pending prioritization):  Audio description support  Multiple audio track support  Poster Frame deposits  And more

39. AV MATERIALS WORKING GROUP Dave

40. The Stewardship Standing Committee charges the Audiovisual Materials Working Group (AVWG) to gather data and make recommendations regarding the priorities for digitizing audio and video content at Harvard and to make recommendations for the tools, policies, and resources needed for AV digitization, delivery, and preservation. Out of scope: motion picture film (strategies already in place), photographs and other visual materials that are not considered time-based media, and commercially available audio and video content. AVWG Charge

41. Summary of Activities Provide feedback to Library Technology Services (LTS) to aid in the development of basic and advanced delivery services for video content. Make recommendations on how to develop priorities for digitization of audio and video content. Develop recommendations for descriptive metadata for video content.

42. Data gathered from 5 Harvard repositories represented in the AVWG Five year forecast Informal Survey for Video Deposit

43. How many hours of digital video do you currently have ?

44. How many hours of analog video do you plan to digitize and deposit to the DRS over the next 5 years ?

45. MEDIA PRESERVATION SERVICES Dave

46. Expanding Services Video Deposit (DRS) Video Technical Metadata Video Digitization 1” Open Reel Type C U-Matic Digi Beta Beta SP Betamax SVHS/VHS DVCAM/DVC-PRO/DV Video-8

47. Expanding Services Formats Mathematically lossless JPEG2000 Quicktime Uncompressed Apple ProRes AVID DNxHD H.264 Metadata Standards EBUCore UTVideoSrc ReVTMD

48. TIMING Andrea

49. Timing ( now – end of 2015) Develop guidelines – Early October 2015: recommendations for setting AV digitization priorities (AV Materials WG) – Rest of 2015: Discussion (Steering Committees and Library Leadership Team) Analyze cost model for AV material – Analysis and recommendations with goal to provide direction for FY17 budgets (Library Finance, LTS, Preservation Services)

50. Timing ( Rest of FY 16) MPS reformatting and DRS piloting – 3 collections with funding deadlines including Hidden Collections with A/V materials – Monitor impact (network transfers, storage, delivery performance, etc.) – Gain experience (efficient workflows, staff expertise) – Draft guidelines (estimating size and cost, specifications for vendors)

51. Timing ( FY 17 - ) Open up video reformatting and DRS deposit service Refine cost model for video Guidelines for prioritizing AV digitization

52. Q&A Franziska