Dear All:
I've been trying to find an email address to contact anyone in the painting collections department of the Louvre but cannot find an email address on their website. There is a contact link for the curators but when you click on this no address comes out. Maybe I just don't know how to do it properly. Any help in this area would be most appreciated.
Warm regards
Ino Manalo
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:52:46 -0400
From: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MUSEUM-L] MUSEUM-L Digest - 20 Jul 2010 to 21 Jul 2010 (#2010-192)
To: [log in to unmask]
Liz,
In terms of organizing archaeological field records, we use a similar approach to what Marybeth has detailed at the Maryland Archaeological Conservation (MAC) Lab for the State of Maryland's archaeological collections. The older collections (particularly those that predate the opening of the Lab in 1998) have been rehabbed by MAC Lab curation staff and organized into the basic categories of field records, lab records, photographic documentation, and administrative/correspondence. While, at present, our current curation standards do not specify for archaeological consultants how records should be organized or categorized prior to delivery to the MAC Lab for permanent curation, they do generally tend to be organized in the same fashion as stated above.
As a rule, I have found applying guidelines/standards from other types of collections, i.e. libraries, archives, museum collections, to archaeological collections to be inadequate. Archaeological collections are unique and do not easily lend themselves to the same kind of categorizing as other collections. Boy, do I wish someone told me that in grad school!
However, having said that, a few years ago the MAC Lab did make an attempt to begin digitizing the State's archaeological field records with mixed results. We received two NEH grants to complete the work. These two grants focused on 35 of the State's most significant collections. The first grant included spot checking catalogs, recataloging, where necessary, and entering all artifact catalogs into a computer database. The second included cataloging and scanning all associated records and photo documentation with the hope of eventually linking all this information and making it available via the web for online access. As I said, we were only moderately successful.
Each record was individually catalogued and assigned a number with the fields being broken down (roughly) as follows: site number, folder (i.e. unit records), subfolder (i.e. square #), document #, document type, provenience (i.e. coordinates), lot # (unique number assigned within a site to each unique provenience), excavation date. Once all the documents were cataloged and organized they were scanned by Maryland State Archives, the slides and photographs were scanned in-house, with the digital files then being sent to our IT department for integrated database creation. The existing database is currently being “tweaked” to make it more user-friendly prior to posting on the web. We have yet to see just how “usable” this online database will be.
There are certainly criticisms to be made about how we organized the records and determined what fields to use (and I welcome them!); however, in hindsight, the largest problem I see with this project is that it was extremely labor intensive and it did not create a system that could be sustained for other older collections not part of the original project or new incoming collections. It took three full time staff members (grant funded) approximately two years to catalog and prepare the documents for scanning and to scan the slides and photos. Once completed, while it did include some of Maryland’s most significant archaeological collections, it was still only approximately 30% of the entire collection. Based on the sheer size of the State's archaeological collections and the small number of curation staff dedicated to them (approximately 1.5 people), continuing the digitization of the remainder of the field records (once the grant funds were gone) was just not possible. To say nothing of spotty IT support or the issues with long term management of the digital media that was created.
I know I’ve wandered a bit from the original question, but I thought perhaps others might be interested in our experience with digitizing records and I welcome any thoughts, comments, or experiences of others who may be undertaking a digitization project.
Becky
Rebecca J. Morehouse
Curator of State Collections
Maryland Archaeological Conservation Laboratory
Jefferson Patterson Park & Museum
10515 Mackall Road
St. Leonard, MD 20685
410-586-8583
[log in to unmask] or [log in to unmask]
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Marybeth Tomka <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Liz,
I have organized my associated documentation by the categories of field records, lab records and administration. All but the administration is separated by site as warranted -- that is, there are a large enough amount of records to warrant different folders. I also then break down the lab and field records into meaningful units: photographs, field forms, daily journals, etc. and for the lab records, original inventories, rehabbed inventories, final catalogue, analysis records, etc. I can send you my full break down if you want it.
I agree that using archival series, subseries can be overkill but for large projects you need the separation by site at the very least. and not reorganizing the documents is useless -- as you know archaeologists are notorious for leaving things jumbled!
Ah, the joys of an archaeological repository!
Regards,
Marybeth
-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list on behalf of MUSEUM-L automatic digest system
Sent: Wed 7/21/2010 11:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: MUSEUM-L Digest - 20 Jul 2010 to 21 Jul 2010 (#2010-192)
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:55:09 -0700
From: "Clevenger, Liz" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Archaeological Collections: associated documentation methodology question
Hello fellow Museum-Lers -
This query is for those who curate or otherwise manage archaeological collections that include associated documentation, and in particular, for those who have cataloged or otherwise developed formal metadata for associated documentation. We are beginning to digitize our hard copy documents and create catalog records to facilitate access to them. Various sources suggest treating associated documentation as archival collections, which would mean (1) not reorganizing the documents in any fashion unless you have archival training (and none of us do) and (2) developing a metadata structure that employs a fairly extensive hierarchy (series--subseries--sub-subseries--file unit etc) for organizing the documents.
I am curious to hear if this archival approach to organization is taken by others who curate associated documentation, particularly in archaeological repositories, or whether the real life situation varies. In my experience, associated documents (especially from older projects) are often not in any particularly sensible order and could benefit greatly from gentle reorganization. And, in my assumption, an extensive hierarchy for describing project documents is potentially overkill.
I welcome any advice or experiences people are willing to share. Please feel free to contact me off-list at [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.
Thanks in advance -
aloha
~Liz
Liz N. Clevenger, MA, RPA
Curator of Archaeology
(415) 561-5086
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Presidio Archaeology Lab | www.presidio.gov/history/archaeology<http://www.presidio.gov/history/archaeology> | (415) 561-ARCH info | (415) 561-5089 fax
The Presidio Trust | P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
=========================================================
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).
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:15:25 -0700
From: David Harvey <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Archaeological Collections: associated documentation methodology question
Liz,
In my experience in working with and researching archaeological collections
it would be appropriate to organize all the associated documentation by
site, just as you would with a group of artifacts. Any papers or photos that
are not identifiable by site would then be left for more research and
organization.
Cheers!
Dave
David Harvey
Senior Conservator and Museum Consultant
Los Angeles, CA
MindingTheMuseum.com
=========================================================
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).
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. ========================================================= 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).