I completely agree, and this is the position we have taken. The original photograph is also an artifact, and is cataloged and accessioned. The copy is data only, and goes into a research file with the information about where the original resides, if known.
Old fashioned? Perhaps. But I have not been convinced yet that this is a distinction without a difference.
Ruth
Ruth S. Taylor
Executive Director
Newport Historical Society
<http://www.newporthistorical.org/> www.newporthistorical.org <http://www.newporthistorical.org/>
401-846-0813
________________________________
From: Museum discussion list on behalf of Dave
Sent: Wed 12/22/2010 1:01 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [MUSEUM-L] Cataloging Scanned photographs
I have to disagree. There is a big difference between an original conventional (chemical) photographic print made directly from an original negative and a print made from a copy negative. The "original" photographic print is called that precisely because it's produced directly from the original negative--without any intervening copy work, and for good reason: you can usually tell the difference in quality between an "original" or direct photographic print and one made via a copy negative. The fact that digital photography requires us to think about images in new ways is no reason to jettison the distinctions which are still important and necessary in describing and evaluating photographs which were handmade with chemical processes--not merely in terms of connoisseurship, but also in terms of historical evidence and analysis.
You can describe the pictorial content of digital images in much the same ways you describe those of chemically-produced photographs, that's certainly true. But you still need to describe how they were produced and provide appropriate metadata indicating whether they're "born-digital," scans of negatives, scans of prints, etc. I think it's a big mistake to assume that you don't need to identify the generation of an image--digital or not.
That said, it may be true that you can treat a digital image the same as a physical, material object for purposes of cataloging, accessioning, numbering, etc. I'm still thinking about the implications.
David Haberstich
Curator of Photography
Archives Center, National Museum of American History
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Dexter <[log in to unmask]>
To: MUSEUM-L <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Mon, Dec 20, 2010 8:16 am
Subject: Re: Cataloging Scanned photographs
I don't understand why a digital image would be treated any differently than a photographic print. After all, an "original" photographic print is not original at all -- it is merely a copy made from a negative -- and frequently made from a copy of the original negative. Aside from the production process, a digitally-produced photo is no different.
David Dexter
Neenah Historical Society
--- On Sat, 12/18/10, Elizabeth Clarke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Elizabeth Clarke <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] Cataloging Scanned photographs
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Saturday, December 18, 2010, 8:40 AM
Based on your description, the photographs are not part of your collection.
A scan of the photograph is a reproduction. Does your organization receive and accession reproductions? I would agree with both of you. It is a nice service to give online viewers the ability to see them; especially if the images are relevant, but probably not part of your collection. Can you create a special set of numbers for this type of material in your database? Maybe call it 'reference' and relate it to artifacts you do have? Or set up another website and link to it to yours, so people who are interested will have access, but you are not going down a rabbit hole by setting a precedent.
A few top of mind thoughts....
Elizabeth Clarke, PhD
Morrill Mt Consulting
________________________________
From: Sarah Griswold <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Fri, December 17, 2010 12:37:11 PM
Subject: [MUSEUM-L] Cataloging Scanned photographs
I am wondering what the general wisdom is regarding the cataloging of scanned photographs, when the original photographs remain in a private person's possession. If they allow us to scan them and then use the scans as we choose, should we consider the scans part of our photograph collection, and add them to Past Perfect? For us they exist ONLY in digital format.
The curator would like to add them to the collection so that online viewers can see the images, but I'm not sure that they should be accorded status equivalent to actual artifacts.
We don't have any specific wording in our collection policy that addresses the issue of copies vs. originals, and in the case of photographs, it's a very thorny issue anyway.
Thanks for any comments
Sarah Griswold
Curatorial Consultant
Curatorial Assistant, Gunn Memorial Museum, Washington, CT
========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
========================================================= Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
