College and Research Libraries


By ALAN B. PRITSKER and J. WILLIAM SADLER 

An Evaluation of Microfilm 
As a Method of Book Storage 

T O INITIATE THIS study, a literature search was conducted to find some of 
the most pressing problems that were 
confronting librarians.1 The subject of 
microfilm storage was chosen from many 
problems which were thought to be solv-
able through an engineering approach. 
Microfilm was chosen for evaluation be-
cause it is the cheapest form of micro-
reproduction for single copies. Although 
cost is not the only criterion by which it 
is possible to evaluate microreproduc-
tions, it is the most conclusive, as most 
other criteria are based on individual 
libraries' needs, aims, and policies. 

In selecting only microfilm, the use of 
micro-publishing (microcards, micro-
prints) and micro-data-processing (Film-
sort, Rapid Selector, Minicard, etc.) 
systems are not considered. Micro-pub-
lishing costs are dependent ~n the num-
ber of copies made, which includes the 
administration involved in selling these 
copies. The determination of adminis-
trative costs at various levels of produc-
tion and an estimate of the number of 
copies that could be sold were consid-
ered beyond the scope of the report. 2 
The evaluation of micro-data-processing 
systems was not made, as they need fur-
ther developmental work, and must 

1 This article is a condensation of a th esis done for 
an M.S. degree in the Columbia Unive rsity School of 
Engineering. Throughout the article, reference is made 
to the original manuscript, which is located in that 
school's library. 

2 Herman H. Fussier, "Photographic R ep roduction 
of Research Materials," L ibrary Trend's, II (1954), 
540. 

Mr. Pritsker is on the staff of Battelle 
Memorial Institute, and Mr. Sadler zs 
with Standard Oil of New jersey. 

prove themselves in use before they can 
gain wide acceptance. 3 Microfilm, on the 
other hand, is a proved technique, and 
the evaluation of it as a method of stor-
age is a necessary step before an evalua-
tion of the data-processing techniques 
can be made. 4 

Scope of the Report 

The object of this study is to compare 
the cost of microfilm storage of a book 
collection with the cost of storing the 
same collection in book form. Particular 
attention is given to the development of 
a standard unit of measure that is appli-
cable to microfilm storage and book stor-
age, and to the development of unit costs 
of microfilm storage. Whether or not the 
cost differentials between two forms of 
storage justify a loss of utility to the re-
searcher is a decision that must be made 
b y the librarian. It is the purpose of this 
report to present the unit costs of the 
different forms of storage so that the li-
brarian may determine which type of 
storage system is best suited to his li-
brary's needs and objectives. 

A research library contains two class-
es of books, the reference portion and 
the research portion. This report con-
siders only the possibility of microfilm-
ing the static, or research, portion of a 
book collection. The rate of use of the 
dynamic reference portion of the collec-
tion makes microfilm undesirable from 
the' standpoint of convenience. 

This report does not attempt to make 
a study of the total costs of operating a 

3 Haynes McMullen, "American University Libraries, 
1955-2005," CRL, XVI (1955), 290. 

4 Rudolph Graphic Microfilm Corporation, Interview, 
April 30, 1956. 

290 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



library. Instead, costs for housing the re-
search collection by various methods are 
compared, assuming that generally the 
same administration, reading room space, 
and the like will be required for the to-
tal library, regardless of the system used 
for storing the research collection. 

Determination of a Standard 
Unit of Measure 

The determination of a standard unit 
of measure is the first step toward eval-
uating microfilm as a method of storage. 
The costs of microfilming are propor-
tional to the number of exposures that 
must be made, and, hence, to the number 
of pages in the collection of books being 
microfilmed. The unit of measure chosen 
should give the number of pages in the 
collection as a function of the number 
of linear feet in the collection. This will 
provide for a direct relationship to be 
established between linear feet of books 
on shelves and linear feet of books on 
microfilm. 

In estimating the average number of 
pages per linear foot of books, a system-
atic sampling plan was used. A system-
atic sampling plan is one where the first 
sample of a population is chosen at ran-
dom, and subsequent samples are chosen 
at discrete intervals determined from 
previous knowledge of the population. 
The Columbia University School of En-
gineering storage library was used as the 
population for this study. The storage 
library had approximately 3,000 linear 
feet of book shelving. Book shelving in-
stead of books was used in estimating 
the size of the population because of its 
ease of computation. This causes the 
number of samples taken to differ from 
the number of samples that were ex-
pected. The ratio of the former to the 
latter gives the percentage of book shelv-
ing being used. One hundred samples 
were chosen as the basis of the sampling 
plan. The size of the sample was arbi-
trarily fixed at one linear foot on the 

JULY 1957 

assumption that a foot was large enough 
to cancel the errors due to the number 
of covers in each sample (a bias would 
be introduced if the size of the sample 
were not appreciably larger than the 
cover size) . The distance between sam-
ples was computed to be 30 linear feet 
by dividing the estimated linear feet in 
the population by the number of sam-
ples times the sample size. 

Statistically, for the Columbia Uni-
versity School of Enginee;ring storage li-
brary, there are 4,600 pages per linear 
foot of books. This figure is · not to be 
used as representing all libraries. It is 
shown statistically in the original manu-
script that the composition of the col-
lection determines the number of pages 
in a linear foot, and that the number of 
pages in a linear foot of edition-bound 
books and of bound journals is signifi-
cantly different. 

Costs of Microfilming 

The costs of microfilming have been 
determined by qividing the costs into 
two categories: costs of conversion and 
costs of storage. Conversion costs include 
the cost of the film and processing, the 
cost of the microfilming equipment, and 
the cost of the labor required. The pos-
sibility of contrasting the work of con-
version to film was considered, but com-
mercial estimates were between one and 
two cents per page. These estimates were 
considered too high, and this study only 
considers the purchase of equipment by 
the library and performance of the work 
under library supervision. Storage costs 
include the costs of cabinets necessary 
to house the film ' and the floor space 
taken up by the cabinets and aisles. This 
cost was computed for bftilding costs of 
$5, $10, $15, $20, and $25 per square 
foot. 

Table I gives the description and unit 
cost5 of the microfilming systems eval-

5 Space limitations do .not permit details of analysis 
required to arrive at these costs. They are presented in 
the original manuscript. 

291 



TABLE I 

DEscRIPTION AND UNIT CosT oF MICROFILMING SYSTEMS 

Costs Per 
Rate of Feed Costs of Linear 

System Reduction (Images/Day) Conversion Foot of 
Number Equipment Ratio 

RemRand Model 12 24-1 
Film-a-record 
Hand feed, 35 mm. film 

2 RemRand Model 12 24-1 
Film-a-record 
Automatic feed, 
35 mm. film 

3 RemRand Model 12 37-1 
Film-a -record 
Automatic feed, 
16 mm. film 

4 Kodagraph Model C-3 16-1 
Hand feed , 35 mm. film 

5 Kodagraph Model C-3 24-1 
Hand feed, 35 mm. film 

uated. Unit costs were determined on a 
basis of 1,000 linear feet of books with 
4,600 pages per linear foot and are for 
a negative copy only. Standard page size 
was taken as Sy-2 x 11 inches, providing 
a factor of safety in making the unit 
cost estimates. These five systems were 
chosen as being representative of the 
types of cameras, reduction rates, film 
size, and rates of feed presently in use. 

The RemRand Model 12 systems re-
quire that the bindings be cut so that 
pages may be fed automatically into the 
machine. This necessitates the elimina-
tion of the books microfilmed from the 
collection. Since the purpose of micro-
filming is to reduce< the space require-
ments, the cutting of the bindings is 
considered inc<msequential. Any possible 
gain from the resale value of these books 
would be more than offset by the in-
creased efficiency in filming. 

The unit costs are significantly lower 
than the estimates of between one and 
two cents per page that were given by 
commercial firms. There are four reasons 

Eight-hour Day Per Page Books 

8,000 $.00268 $12.33 

35,000 .00204 9.38 

35,000 .00111 5.11 

3,000 .00476 21.90 

3,000 .00402 18.49 

for the lower costs in the systems studied: 
(I) no profit is to be made on micro-

filming; (2) no supervision or adminis-
trative costs are allocated to the cost, as 
library personnel must be on hand in 
any event; (3) overhead costs are re-
duced as office and administrative space 
is not needed; and ( 4) no inspection or 
editing is done. 

Usually, when being microfilmed, the 
finished roll of film is carefully edited 
frame by frame to detect flaws in the 
films, missing pages, and the like. This 
is a slow and expensive process, increas-
ing labor costs immensely. For the fol-
lowing reasons, it is believed that such 
editing is unnecessary. 

I. Since the material being microfilmed 
is little used, and in most instances is used 
only for a quick reference, the probability 
that the page desired is missing or dam-
aged is so small that the cost of purchas-
ing a new book when this happens will 
be less than the cost of inspection. 

2. If pages were missing from the orig-
inal text, the library would make no e£-

292 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



TABLE II 

ANNUAL CosTs VERSus BUILDING CosTS FOR COMPACT A D CONVENTIONAL 
BooK SToRAGE SYSTEMS 

Origin of Building Costs in Dollars per Square Foot 
System Annual Cost 5 10 15 20 25 

Bracket-type shelving, Shelving 1,676.27 1,676.27 1,676.27 1,676.27 1,676.27 
35.5" aisles Building 3,351.99 6,703.98 10,055.97 13,407.96 16,759.95 

Total 5,028.26 8,380.25 ll,732.24 15,084.23 18,436.22 

Bracket-type shelving, Shelving 1,676.27 1,676.27 1,676.27 1,67.6.27 1,676.27 
20.7" aisles Building 2,394.43 4,788.86 7,183 .29 9,577.72 ll,972.15 

Total 4,070.70 6,465.13 8,859.56 ll,254.99 13,648.42 

Art Metal, with 4 Shelving 6,025.80 6,025.80 6,025.80 6,025 .80 6,025.80 
swing units Building 2 ,192.84 4,385.68 6,578.52 8,771.36 10,964.20 

Total 8,218.64 10,411.48 12,604.32 14,797.16 16,990.00 

Hamilton Units Shelving 5 ,879.76 5,879.76 5,879.76 5,879.76 5,879.76 
Building 1,601.22 3,202.44 4,803.66 6,404.88 8,006.10 

----
Total 

fort to replace them until someone com-
plained. Therefore, it seems reasonable 
that no effort be made to replace pages 
in the microfilm until a complaint arises. 

3. Both types of machines being consid-
ered are equipped with warning devices 
that indicate trouble with film, lighting, 
or feed . In addition, the Film-a-record 
automatically shuts off if more than one 
page enters the machine at the same time: 

4. If any gross defect is present in the 
film, the person who prepares the box 
label is likely to detect it when he exam-
ines the first few frames while identifying 
the roll. However, this examination 
would not detect possible errors in the 
remainder of the roll. 

5. If a book is so rare that a microfilmed 
copy could not be purchased or borrowed 
from another library, then the book should 
not have been microfilmed and discarded 
in the first place. 

6. A careful, 100 per cent inspection 
will not detect all of the errors, anyway. 

Space requirements are estimated by 
making the best fit of microfilm cabinets 
in a 23x23-foot module. Two makes of 

.JULY 1957 

7,480.98 9,082 .20 10,683.42 12,284.64 13,885.86 

microfilm storage cabinets are consid-
ered: Remington Rand and Yawman 
and Erbe. A 23x23-foot module was se-
lected so that the comparison of micro-
storage with conventional storage could 
be made on the basis of Muller's 6 work. 
Results show that one Yawman and Erbe 
cabinet, including necessary aisle space, 
requires 6.78 square feet, while a Rem-
ington Rand cabinet requires 7.06 square 
feet. A Yawman and Erbe cabinet holds 
900-16 mm rolls or 612-35 mm rolls 
of film, while a Remington Rand cab-
inet holds 1,125-16 mm or 675-35 mm 
rolls. From this analysis, it is seen the 
the Yawman and Erbe cabinets have a 
slight cost advantage and, therefore, will 
be used in tne remainder of the report. 

Com paris on of Systems 7 

In designing a library, considerations 
6 Robert H. Muller, "Evaluation of Compact Book 

Storage Systems," Proceedings of the 1954 ACRL 
Building Plans Institute (Chicago: Association of Col· 
lege and Reference Librarians, 1954), p. 77-93. 

7 In the original manuscript, comparison was made 
on both initial and annual cost bases. Due to limited 
space, only annual costs have been included . 

293 



TABLE III 

A 1 NUAL COSTS VERSUS BUILDING COSTS FOR MICROFILM SYSTEMS 

System 
Number* 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Origin of 
Annual Cost 

Initial conversion 
Yearly conversion 
Bldg. & equipment 

Total 

Initial conversion 
Yearly conversion 
Bldg. & equipment 

Total 

Initial conversion 
Yearly conversion 
Bldg. & equipment 

Total 

Initial conversion 
Yearly conversion 
Bldg. & equipment 

Total 

Initial conversion 
Yearly conversion 
Bldg. & equipment 

Total 

"" For definition of Systems see Table I. 

5 

10,313 
5,990 

900 

17,203 

7,837 
4,870 

900 

13,607 

4,276 
2,750 

423 

7,449 

18,300 
10,318 

1,337 

29,955 

15,410 
8,688 

900 

24,998 

must be made for housing the present 
collection and providing space for the 
expected collection at the end of some 
specified time period. Considered over a 
period of time, microfilming has two cost 
advantages: (1) the cost of microfilming 
a collection as it grows is spread over 
the entire period, requiring less initial 
investment of capital; and (2) the in-
vestment in conversion to microfilm has 
a much longer life expectancy than shelv-
ing. In other words, the life of microfilm 
can be considered infinite and the an-
nual costs computed on this basis. The 
cabinets housing the film must be re-
placed approximately as often as shelv-
ing is replaced, but the cost of cabinets is 

Building Costs in Dollars per Square Foot 

10 15 20 25 

10,313 10,313 10,313 10,313 
5,990 5,990 5,990 · . 5,990 
1,008 1,116 1,223 1,331 

17,311 17,419 17,526 17,634 

7,837 7,837 7,837 7,837 
4,870 4,870 4,870 4,870 
1,008 1,116 1,223 1,331 

13,715 13,823 13,930 14,038 

4,276 4,276 4,276 4,276 
2,750 2,750 2,750 2,750 

449 492 545 593 

7,475 7,518 7,571 7,619 

18,300 18,300 18,300 18,300 
10,318 10,318 10,318 10,318 

1,499 1,660 1,822 1,984 

30,117 30,278 30,440 30,602 

15,410 15,410 15,410 15,410 
8,688 8,688 8,688 8,688 
1,008 f,116 1,233 1,331 

25,106 25,214 25,321 25,429 

small compared to the amount invested 
in shelving. 

In order to compare the annual costs 
of conventional microfilm storage, a re-
search collection is considered to contain 
16,666% linear feet of books (this figure 
is used by Muller), and, at the end of 25 
years, a design figure proposed by Met-
calf, 8 it is expected to have grown to 
33,333Ys linear feet. In conventional 
storage, building and stacks must be pro-
vided for the estimated figure capacity. 
However, microfilm conversion will be 
split, the current holding filmed immedi-
ately, and the rest filmed as books are 

8 Keyes D. Metcalf, "Spatial Problems in University 
Libraries," Library Trends, II (1954), 558. 

294 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



added to the research collection. This 
comparison is valid only when the size 
of the collection is over 5,000 linear feet 
of books, as the unit costs were derived 
assuming full capacity of the filming 
machines. If the collection is less than 
5,000 books, the annual costs per linear 
foot of the microfilm systems increase 
rapidly, and comparisons at each level of 
operation must be made individually. 

Annual cost is the division of the ini-
tial investment into equivalent uniform 
annual payments during the life of the 
investment. To compute annual costs, 
an interest rate of 5 per cent and a de-
preciation rate of 2 per cent, as assumed 
by Fremont Rider, 9 are used. 

For building and equipment of the 
conventional storage systems, Muller's 
figures were used as a basis, and annual 
costs were computed from capital recov-
ery cost based on the expected life of 
building and equipment. The capital re-
covery cost is obtained by multiplying 
the total investment by an appropriate 
capital recovery factor from compound 
interest tables. 10 Salvage value at the 
end of the life of the building and equip-
ment is considered to be zero. These 
computations were made for four types 
of conventional storage: , (1) bracket-type, 
35.5" aisles; (2) bracket-type, 20.7" aisles; 
(3) Art Metal and Swing units; and (4) 
Hamilton units. Table II gives the an-
nual costs of storage of 33,333Ys linear 
feet in book form with estimated life of 
building and shelves at fifty years ~nd 
interest at 5 per cent for the above four 
systems at various building costs per 
square foot. 

For the annual costs of the microfilm 
systems, building and equipment costs 
are computed in the manner described 
for conventional systems. However, since 
the cost of conversion has become an in-
trinsic part of the value of the film, the 
investment in conversion is considered 

9 Fremont Rider , "Library Cost Accounting," L i-
brary Quarterly, VI (1936) , 370-71. 

10 Eugene L . Grant , Principles of En gineering 
Eco n om y . (New York: Ronald Press, 1950), chapter 7. 

JULY 1957 

Annual Cost 
(000 omitted) 

Figure 1- Annual cost s ver sus build-
ing costs for the systems shown, 
with estimated life of buildiong and 
shelves at SO years, interest at 5 % , 
with Yawman and Erbe cabin ets for 
33,3 33 1 I 3 linear feet of books 

$30 

tlS s.:_._-----------~ 

$1S 

tlo 

0 
10 .lS .lO 

Building Costs in $/ ft 2 

LEGE N D 
- - - -- Bracket-Type 35.5" Aisles 
- . . - . . -Bracket-Ty pe 20.7" Ai sles 
- -- ---- - -Art Metal 4 Swing Units 
-·- · - · -·-·-Hamilton Units 

Number ed Systems a s defined by Table I 

to have perpetual life. Therefore, only 
an interest charge is made. The micro-
filming is assumed to be done over the 
twenty-five years at a uniform rate. 

The average annual charge for film-
ing is dependent on the number of linear 
feet to be fihned a year. This was com-
puted and converted to present worth11 
using compound interest tables, and in-
terest is charged on the amount of the 
present worth. Table III shows the an-
nual costs versus building costs for micro-
film systems with estimated life of build-

11 Ibid., chapter 8. 

295 



ing and shelves at fifty years, interest at 5 
per cent, with Yawman and Erbe cab-
inets, for 33,3331/s linear feet of books 
converted to microfilm, 50 per cent ini-
tially and 50 per cent over twenty-five 
years. 

Figure 1 is a graphical representation 
of Tables II and III and shows that mi-
crofilm system 3 has lower annual costs 
than any other system when building 
costs rise above $12 per square foot. It is 
cheaper than compact storage systems at 
all levels of building costs. System 2 
comes into favorable position cost-wise 
when building costs rise above $ 17 per 
square foot. Systems 1, 4, and 5 are not 
comparable with the other systems. 

It should be noted that at the end of 
25 years the library is filled to capacity. 
Since microfilm offers the largest saving 

in space, 12 the extended or increased use 
of microfilm will enable the library to 
continue operation effectively. With 
book storage, the efficiency of the library 
is going to decrease as the capacity of 
the building is exceeded. 

Conclusions 

On a cost basis, microfilm is feasible 
as a form of storage for a large collection 
only if librarians are willing to accept 
a high reduction ratio, little or no in-
spection of the finished product, an im-
age less perfect than could be obtained 
using a 35 mm planetary camera, and 
the destruction of the text. If a posi-
tive copy of the film is required, the cost 
of microfilm storage is prohibitive. 

13 P er centa ge g ain over convention a l type storage 
( 38 .7" ai sle s ) for system s 1, 2, and 5 is 260 per cent ; 
for syst em 3 , 640 per cent; for system 4 , 170 per cent. 

The University Library 

296 

I am confident that you will agree with me that the hea.rt of a uni-
versity is its library-into which and out of which the life blood of the 
instructional and r.esearch programs flows in a never ceasing stream. 
Certainly } the University of California could not have won and held its 
present} proud position in the academic world with a library of lesser 
scope and quality than it has sought to maintain throughout its history. 
Nor can it hope to hold that position in the future unless its library 
continues to grow as knowledge expands. One of the world's distin-
guished centers of learning has developed here, largely because the fore-
sight of the founders, the wisdom of the faculty} the planning of its 
administrators and regents} and the generosity of donors have consist-
ently combined to build} in a new land and a young university} one of 
the world's greatest collections of books.-ROBERT GoRDON SPROUL, Presi-
dent of the University of California, in Two Million: Several Addresses 
Given Upon the Acquisition of Its Two Millionth Volume by the Li-
brary of the University of California at Berkeley (Berkeley, University 
of California Library, 1956) , p. 15-16. 

COLLEGE AND RESEARCH L'1J3.RARjES 

-I