Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 30 Sep 1996 09:35:35 -0400 |
In-Reply-To: |
<1238510730091996/A26619/SUSSEX/11A9F1F32500*@MHS> |
Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I participated in several oral history projects in
different museums. The oral histories on which I
worked were recorded as professional grade videotapes,
which were then dubbed to VHS, than transcribed into
text. The question to be answered, as the original
recording medium deteriorates, is what about the
oral history is most important--the words or the
images? If the words are most important, forgive me for
sounding archaic, but isn't a paper transcription the
best and most long lasting record?
If the images are as important, CD is probably the most
long-lived alternative medium, although I have no scientific
basis for saying so.
Jenni Rodda, Curator
Visual Resources Collections
Institute of Fine Arts
1 East 78th Street
New York, NY 10021
(212) 772-5872, fax (212) 772-5807, [log in to unmask]
|
|
|