Digital BW, The Print

Why not shoot the originals as 4x5 B&W negatives, scan them, then print 3k carbon prints on RAG paper.  That would give you the best quality, and permanence.  Everyone should know that writing files to CD is not archival.  Some CDs break down in as little as six to seven years.  DVDs are better.  I write my important files to gold CDs which are better then the silver ones, but only by a factor of about four.

The real problem with both CDs and DVDs is that will the equipment be available to read them if they survive 50 years from now.  How many of you out there can read a floppy yet?  I was still using them only twenty years ago.

Another problem with CD's and DVD's permanence is write speed.  Disc written at high speeds do not keep as long as ones written at slow speeds.  The dye that records the info in the disc fades with time and use.  The data is written more precisely when written at slow speeds, and the fading has less effect in making the data unreadable.

I have been shooting 4x5 B&W, scanning the negatives, and printing 3k prints both in carbon and pigment and the quality is great.  Much better then shooting digital with any of my three DSLRs (Canon 1Ds, 5D, and Nikon D3).  The range of tomes captured in a 4x5 B&W negative can not be matched by any sensor.  My PhaseOne/Hasselblad is the only one that comes close.

Ben