Print

Print


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