LISTSERV 16.5 - ARLIS-L Archives

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started. LISTSERV 16.5 - ARLIS-L Archives

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The second meeting of the Midwestern Art Cataloging Discussion Group convened at 10:05am on Friday, December 7, 2001 at the Columbia College Library. Twenty catalogers were in attendance.

1. Topic: visual resources classification

While some of those present confessed to having no written scheme, most use a modified classification system such as Simon-Tansey (from the University of California-Santa Cruz) or Fogg (from the Fogg Art Museum). Exceptions are often made for faculty preferences, and in some cases librarians work closely with the faculty on issues related to classification. It was noted that the interests of the faculty affect the classification system and that the system must respond to the patrons. As a result, no one model can be identified because every system is influenced by the faculty, the users in general, and the curriculum. But while most agreed that the system should respond to the users, it was also noted that the response should not take the form of dividing the collection into drawers of slides for each professor. Furthermore, the system cannot be modified to fit every request, as sometimes individual users' needs and wants are not good for the collection as a whole. Most advocated the idea of an overarching system that may be modified in its smaller components. Still, some cited the difficulty in cases where there is precedence for making special arrangements for individual users. But if all else fails, most agreed that they can fall back on the catalog as a record of holdings, however those holdings may be arranged. As a cautionary note, it was observed that classification should not be driving cataloging, and vice versa. The issue of catalogs that combine print and visual resources was raised in this context. There were few cases in which the two are truly combined in one catalog, although OCLC's Worldcat is one of these cases. More often visual resource and print catalogs are separate.

2. Topic: cataloging manuals and in-house documentation

Several librarians indicated that their documentation was either currently available online (although in some cases it is only accessible internally) or that they were moving in this direction. It was mentioned that Web Dewey will allow library's to annotate their copies, but some wondered if this wouldn't open the door to huge maintenance projects. However, maintaining the notations should be easier in the online environment than it would be in print. Some of those present have had the experience of taking on a job when there was no manual or only outdated information and had to piece together or create documentation. Others wondered about using local notes in authority records to record information.

The question of how much local variation there was in practice was brought up and most agreed that they were trying to get away from non-standard practices, although many come from libraries had used some non-standard practices in the past. It was generally agreed that adhering to standards made things simpler in general and could make creating and maintaining documentation easier as well. The idea of using a "best example" system of actual records in place of written instructions for various art cataloging practices was put forth, but it was generally agreed that notes and written instructions used in conjunction with examples is preferable, particularly for the purposes of training. This raised the specter of training and the question of whether librarians used their in-house documentation for this purpose. The group was split on this issue, with some making heavy use of documentation in the training process and others using a train-as-you-go method of instruction and examples. Finally, it was noted that a "guide to good practice" was being developed as part of the VRA core project Some of the problems encountered in this endeavor are the difficulty of determining the entity when cataloging images and creating standard titles.

3. Topic: reviewing cataloging output

Some librarians review all records while others perform spot checking or rely on training and make the quality of output a cataloger's personal responsibility. It was generally agreed that the question of whether or not to review depends on the situation. For the Northwestern University slide library the quality of the data is more important than the time devoted to review (usually 3-4 hours per week). The library has recently standardized some practices and is adding records based on slide labels, so review has been deemed necessary, particularly to insure uniformity among subject heading selection. In this case automated reviews in the form of reports run on the catalog(one of the most common forms of review among those that do not review records on an individual basis) were not possible. At the MacLean Visual Resources Center they proof one another's work and they feel that this provides a forum for discussion. For some it was important that the cataloger's initials appear in the record to insure that questions that may arise later about a record may be directed to the person responsible. Some library systems automatically mark a record, but in others initials must be manually inserted. Finally, it was noted that reviewing output was also a management issue and that at some point one must accept a level of variety in cataloging.

4. Topic: subject headings for images

A discussion of the value of subject headings in visual resource collections was an offshoot of the previous topic. The idea of not using subject headings for visual resources was proposed to eliminate the problem of reviewing cataloging for subject heading conformity. In the absence of subject headings titles would provide access. It was argued that subject headings for images are nebulous at best and not worth the effort, but others argued that subject headings were helpful for studio art students and other non-art history students, faculty outside of the art history department, and other types of users. Again, the user population will affect the practice. As for the types of subject headings used for image collections, these ranged from modified Library of Congress Subject Headings to homegrown systems to short lists of broad headings (i.e. portrait photography). Some felt that the subjects users would be looking for (i.e. political corruption) would not be covered by LCSH headings, but others advocated LCSH because the headings can be used to cross reference the visual resources catalog with the main library catalog.

5. Topic: Art and Architecture Thesaurus

A further offshoot of this discussion dealt with the Art and Architecture Thesaurus and the question of whether or not anyone was using it to catalog books. Most agreed it was too costly to use for books because AAT terms would need to be created for virtually all incoming copy cataloging, and some felt that the terms in AAT were simply inadequate. However, AAT headings were used recently in a project at the University of Chicago to catalog a collection of broadsides, manuscripts, and related materials on the American West. In cases where the bibliographer preferred an AAT term these were added to the record and coded appropriately, but LCSH were used for the bulk of the project.

6. Topic: education for visual resources librarians

The last topic of discussion was the education of visual resources librarians. While acknowledging that few library science programs offer courses in the field of visual resources or art librarianship, most felt that the MLS was a worthwhile degree. As to the usefulness of an art history degree, those present came from different backgrounds themselves and they cited examples from both sides: catalogers with M.A.s who were terrible at cataloging images, catalogers without M.A.s who were excellent visual resource catalogers, and vice versa. Some wondered if the visual resources librarian of the future would be a "digital image manager" without MLS or M.A., but others felt future visual resources librarians would need digital management training in addition to an MLS.

Error during command authentication.