Hello,

I am on the committee that is working on updating Nomenclature.  I've read
your posts with interest and will make sure your comments are passed along
to the other committee members.

Deb Arenz


****************************************
Deborah B. Arenz
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Senior Museum Curator
Nebraska State Historical Society
PO Box 82554
Lincoln, NE 68501-2554
402-471-4759
Fax:  402-471-3314
To learn more about the histories we share, visit www.nebraskahistory.org
<http://www.nebraskahistory.org>



-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Elizabeth Furlow
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 5:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Nomenclature (was Cataloguing Reproductions in PastPerfect)


I second Lucy's endorsement of the introduction to the original
Nomenclature.  The categories in Revised Nomeclature make more sense than
the oirginal ones, but the explanation of how to determine the name of an
object is much more complete and understandable in the 1978 version.  I
copied it from the old book and have all new interns read the 1978
introduction PLUS the Revised introduction to learn about Nomenclature
classification.

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucy Sperlin [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 12:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Nomenclature (was Cataloguing Reproductions in PastPerfect)


Lea,

Chenhall's  NOMENCLATURE (original 1978 edition) addressed the issue of
reproductions and replicas. I believe the advice still holds good:

In your first example, the lithograph would be named as such, with the fact
that it is a reproduction shown in the catalog record  -in the description
for sure, and elsewhere as your internal custom of PP usage dictates, I
think.  (Sabrina's suggestion about using both artists in the artist field
is a good one.)

The second example sounds more like a replica:
	"A replica is...an attempt to create an object which, as nearly as
possible, exactly duplicates the original. It is done in the same medium and
to the same scale as the original object....When a replica is identified, it
is necessary to include the word REPLICA as part of the object name so that
there can be no possible confusion with the original in the catalog records.
The procedure for achieving this is to use exactly the same classification
term/object name combination that would be used for cataloguing the original
but append the word REPLICA to the object name as a suffix qualifier."
(example: in EXCHANGE MEDIUM use "COIN, REPLICA")
								Chenhall,
1978 p.20


If anyone involved in working on the next update of NOMENCLATURE reads this,
let's put in a big plug for including the first twenty pages of the 1978
edition (which were eliminated from the 1988 edition). It is very difficult
to use the system correctly and consistently without them!

Lucy Sperlin
 (Nomenclature user since 1979)


-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Lea Foster Warden
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 11:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Cataloguing Reproductions in PastPerfect

Hello,

We are trying to determine the best way to enter reproductions into our
PastPerfect database.  A hypothetical example would be a lithograph by Joe
Smith of a painting by van Gogh or a painting by Sally May that is a copy of
a van Gogh.

We have consulted the Getty web site but have not determined the best way to
transfer recommendations to PastPerfect. The revised Chenall nomenclature
does not address reproductions.

Questions:
Where should we note that the item is a reproduction? Object Name, Other
Name, Description, Custom Field..
How should we handle the layered artists? Using the example above place the
following in the artist field [Smith, Joe (orig. van Gogh)]

Lea Foster Warden
Collections Manager
The Yager Museum of Art and Culture

=========================================================
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).