Hi, all,
Admittedly, I'm cribbing here to some extent from AMIM (American Moving Image Materials) rules for physical description of video recordings, although AMIM would put more info in the <extent> element, but how about something like:
<physdesc>
<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet> <dimensions>3/4 inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
Leave out "color" if the tape is black-and-white, of course! Just suggesting that sound and color characteristics are useful.
Duration is a problem in EAD. It's another way of stating extent in a way. Could <extent> be repeated after <genreform>?
<physdesc>
<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <extent>(60 minutes)</extent>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>
<dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
Or the duration could follow the number of cassettes:
<physdesc>
<extent>1 60-minute</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>
<dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
The tape width is important playback info, so I'd suggest including the dimensions element. The brand name of the tape, Scotch, might be more appropriate in a note, although you could precede "U-matic" with "Scotch."
Best,
Marsha
Marsha Maguire
Recorded Sound Cataloger
Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division
Library of Congress, Packard Campus
Culpeper, VA 22701-7551
email: [log in to unmask]
Opinions are my own.
-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Giovanni Michetti
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: phys-what?
Hi Michele,
here my comments:
1. <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc>
It's not a proper solution, since <extent> should be used for quantity only.
2. <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
I don't like it. I wouldn't consider "Scotch Umatic" a type of material
-- I'd rather say it's a "videotape" from the <genreform> point of view.
In fact, looking at the examples in the Tag Library you'll find 'videotape', 'sound recording', 'drawing' etc.
OK, I guess we may consider it as a sort of synecdoche, as we use 'mp3'
to generically mean a (compressed) 'sound recording', but it seems we need to 'stretch' things too much.
Anyway, you may refine it adding <extent>:
<physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
3. <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>
It seems a good option.
Actually <phystech> "includes details of [their] physical composition or the need for particular hardware or software to preserve or access the materials" (Tag Library): so I'd note "Scotch Umatic" implies the need for a particular device but it's not per se information about that device. Anyway, I still think <phystech> is a good option.
4. <physdesc><physfacet type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc>
I don't like it: <physfacet> is about the "aspect of the appearance of the described materials". Of course "Umatic UCA 60" can be handled as 'appearance' but it doesn't seem the best option.
5. What about
<did>
...
<physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>videotape</genreform></physdesc>
...
</did>
<phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>
?
Too redundant?
Giovanni Michetti
University of Rome "La Sapienza"
Il 07/12/2010 17.43, Michele R Combs ha scritto:
> What's the appropriate element combination to describe the specific type of audio or videorecording, e.g. Scotch Umatic UCA 60?
> <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc>
> <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
> <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech> <physdesc><physfacet
> type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc>
> These all seem about equally right to me. Thoughts?
> Michele
|