From an archival moving image perspective, it's not only creators/contributors that share common contextual relationships to the different versions of Blade Runner. For instance, an archive can hold pre-print material such as the original camera negative, masterpostive, interpositive, answer prints, etc. in addition to the theatrical projection prints that were exhibited in theaters. Then there are the sound components, any special effects, CGI, outtakes, trailers to market the film, etc. that were created post-production. These all encompass the raw materials that were used to edit and market the various versions of Blade Runner over the years that were never released as publications for the home market. 

A significant challenge that we struggle with in moving image archives is documenting the various print and pre-print materials and relating them to their various versions. Typically it is done by associating multiple elements to a single work/expression. You can see this perspective by looking at standards such as the European CEN Cinematographic Works model ( and PBCore (, both inspired by FRBR that allow multiple filmographic elements to be associated with a single work/expression. This perspective seemingly is not accommodated in RDA, since RDA predominantly instructs catalogers to transcribe information from a single manifestation (publication), and I am having trouble imagining that this perspective of contextualzing multiple elements to a single work/expression is accommodated in Bibframe.



Andrea Leigh
Moving Image Processing Unit Head
Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation
19053 Mt. Pony Rd.
Culpeper, VA  22701
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Eric Miller
Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2013 3:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe, flexibility and FRBR

On Jan 6, 2013, at 8:06 PM, Kelley McGrath <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> The second case is when the expression isn't really a single independent variable (or couple of closely related ones such as French Dolby surround soundtrack), but rather a cluster of attributes that are inherently related and need to be reused together. For commercial videos, these are usually distinct intellectual or artistic versions (rather than things like dubbed soundtracks that are meant to be substitutions for accessibility). For example, a director's cut would usually have a duration associated with it and we might also know of a date or an editor. It might also need its own summary and would be connected to its own reviews or other annotations.
> Work                           Expression                               Manifestation
> Blade runner (1982)   Final cut (2007)                       DVD (2007)
>                                     117 min.                                  2 discs
>                                     Review:                                   ISBN 9781419850028
>                                        OCLC# 173522015

Again an alternative interpretation of this is that Blade runner (the theatrical release) and Blade Runner (the extended / much better directors cut) are simply 2 different Works each of which share contextual relationships to common resources (actors, directors, etc. etc.).  In the Work associated with the theatrical release, I would expect to see that Editor you mentioned. 

In this case, the separation into different Works is important for several reasons, but one is simply they have very different Instances associated with them. The theatrical release came out in VHS, Beta, LaserDisc, etc. while the Directors cut was released later in DVD, BluRay, etc.  I'm a bit embarrassed to say I have just about all of these ;)

Eric Miller
President, Zepheira "The Art of Data" tel:+1.617.395.0229