Digital Files & Backups

A physical collection may survive for generations while the knowledge surrounding it disappears in a single hardware failure or inaccessible account. The archive may contain the only evidence of what was owned, where it came from, whether it was genuine or restored, which components belong together, what an insurer accepted and how the collector wanted the material handled.

For an executor, documentation is practical infrastructure. It supports identification, custody, valuation, insurance, distribution and disposal. The record is not a decorative catalogue sitting beside the objects; it is the bridge between the collector's expertise and the decisions another person must eventually make.

The archive should contain enough information for someone unfamiliar with the collection to reconstruct the collector's understanding of it. Not every minor object requires the same depth, but every significant item or deliberately managed group needs an identity, a location and a route to its supporting evidence.

One file should not be forced to perform every role. The best-preserved version, the version used in daily work and the version prepared for an executor have different purposes. Layering them protects authoritative evidence without making the estate dependent upon technical expertise.

Collectors often use the word backup for any second place where a file appears. That creates false confidence. A synchronised folder can repeat a deletion; a backup can restore a lost file but preserve no explanation of it; an archive can preserve meaning but still be vulnerable if no recoverable copies exist.

The familiar 3-2-1 principle - three copies, two storage arrangements or media, one off-site - remains a useful starting point. For estate documentation, strengthen it by keeping a dated estate snapshot and ensuring that at least one copy cannot be immediately altered or deleted by the live system.

Specialist collection software can preserve rich relationships, but an estate should not depend upon the continuing operation of a single application, subscription or proprietary format. Every important dataset should have both a structured export and a human-readable form.

Stable identifiers, consistent file names and a simple folder structure do more than create tidiness. They preserve relationships when links break, software changes or files are copied outside the original system.

Metadata may record creation date, author, photographer, camera details, copyright, file format, version, source and relationships to other records. It can be stripped by messaging services, screenshots, simplified exports or print-and-rescan workflows. Important facts should therefore also appear in the inventory rather than existing only inside technical file properties.

Cloud platforms can improve resilience and access, but they also create dependencies upon account ownership, payment, email control, two-factor authentication, provider survival and export quality. The estate needs a register of what each service contains and what happens when the collector can no longer maintain it.

An unencrypted archive may expose values, addresses, signatures, purchase history, correspondence, financial details and security arrangements. An encrypted archive may be effectively destroyed if the recovery key dies with the collector. Estate planning must solve both problems at once.

The executor cannot recover an archive that nobody can locate. Record the existence and location of computers, laptops, phones, tablets, external drives, USB devices, memory cards, network storage, hardware security keys and printed recovery information.

Label physical media with purpose, last-update date, encryption status and whether it is a working, backup or archive copy. Do not attach the decryption key to the drive. Replace vague statements such as "everything is on the computer" with a precise device and location description.

Many collectors trust backup software they have never used to restore anything. A successful backup notification proves only that a process reported success. A recovery test proves whether the expected material can be retrieved and understood.

The executor should be able to begin safely without first understanding the collector's entire technical environment. The pack is an orientation and action tool, not a complete duplication of every record.

Frequency should reflect how quickly records change and how much work, evidence or estate clarity could be lost. The more active the collection, the shorter the interval between recoverable copies. Stable estate snapshots can be less frequent, but they should be recreated after major changes.

Most catastrophic documentation failures do not begin with no system at all. They begin with a plausible arrangement that was never examined from the executor's perspective.

Proportionate estate planning matters. A modest collection does not require institutional digital-preservation machinery, but every collection needs a minimum route from object to record and from failure to recovery.

The review should be capable of finding both technical failure and documentary drift. A perfectly functioning backup of an outdated inventory is not an estate-ready archive.