Hi Marie,

Your decision to use bar codes in this cases seems well founded. However, my 
some types seem to fade spontaneously over a longer period, depending on the 
type of paper and ink used. In  your case, you don't want to replace them 
every ten years. We learned this the hard way...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marie O'Connell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RFID

> Thank you
> We are not a library, we are a  broadcasting sound archive.  Most, and I
> mean most, of our items may get pulled out once in 10 or 12 years, or 
> never
> (depending on anniversaries, etc).  My gut instinct is to use barcodes,
> because we can do that for virtually no investment and maintain our
> accession number, which has been the whole purpose of this exercise,
> re-numbering artifacts that have no meaningful number when we go to 
> preserve
> it.  Plus, the only people handling these are archivists, and not
> patrons/normal humans (hehe), so I would trust the barcode would remain
> intact for a long time.
> I looked at the Wiki page and found it kinda useful.
> Will keep you posted as to what we do.
> Cheers
> Marie
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Hi Marie
>> I'm not sure how much research you have put into RFID yet but Wikipedia
>> will at least give you some idea:
>> For archival storage you would have to consider passive RFID because the
>> active versions require a battery. To my knowledge, there is no evidence 
>> of
>> RFID chips having any affect on nearby magnetic media. The chips are 
>> being
>> implanted in credit cards and passports for example which have adjacent
>> magnetic stripes. The RF power generated by even the high output active 
>> chips is so low that it's hard to imagine how they would affect the
>> coercivity of pre recorded audio tape. Video tape (I would think) with 
>> it's
>> very high coercivity would be out of the question.
>> You would be using passive RFID that would only be read (energized or
>> resonated if you will) once or twice a year for inventory purposes. I 
>> can't
>> imagine their being a problem for long term storage.
>> I suspect that your biggest consideration at this point would be cost. 
>> The
>> technology may not be cost effective unless you have tens of thousands of
>> units to inventory.
>> My greatest concern would be backwards compatibility. If you implement 
>> 4.0 today will it be readable in 25 years by RFID 10.2.1? For the 
>> present, I
>> wouldn't abandon your barcode system and look into the possible addition 
>> of
>> RFID.
>> I'm still a fan of the old fashioned printed label on the binder or
>> somewhere else in addition to whatever computerized system that's in 
>> place.
>> It only takes one data entry error and then........
>> Keep us posted!
>> Cheers!
>> Corey Bailey
>> At 07:37 PM 12/13/2009, you wrote:
>>> Hi all
>>> We need to renumber some of our older accessions and have been 
>>> considering
>>> barcodes with the accession number included.  It was suggested to me 
>>> today
>>> that we could be using RFID (radio frequency ID).  As I know virtually
>>> nothing about them I have an uneasy feeling about applying this 
>>> technology
>>> to magnetic tape boxes and reels.
>>> Does any audio visual archive use this technology on its tape boxes 
>>> and/or
>>> reels?
>>> Is there any danger to the magnetic tape itself, considering both the 
>>> box
>>> and reel would need the same identifier?
>>> Can the actual accession number be put on these so as to be seen 
>>> visibly?
>>> Any thoughts would be much appreciated.  Thanks in advance.
>>> Cheers
>>> Marie