 |
 |
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... Pekka ----- 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: >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-frequency_identification >> >> 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 >> RFID >> 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 >> RFID >> 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 >>> >> >