Cataloging Use Cases
Museum of the Moving Image
The Museum of the Moving Image is currently working on several cataloging and digitization projects, which involve a combination of original cataloging, updating inventory records, and converting paper records to digital format.
The Museum's CMS contains information about each object in the collection, which was gathered between 2003 and 2007 as part of a collections inventory. That information was originally entered into a Microsoft Access database, and then exported to the Museum's current CMS. The inventory focused on identification rather than description; these records are considered insufficient for display to the public through the Museum's online catalog.
Many objects in the collection have been cataloged; these catalog cards were held in a card catalog until the late 1990s, when the catalog was disassembled and the cards added to each object's accession file. The information in these cards has not been added to the objects' CMS records.
For each object cataloged, Museum staff must: find the inventory record in the CMS, evaluate the information contained therein, go to the object's accession file to see if there is a catalog card available, and then combine all these pieces of information along with original research to create a complete catalog record. Catalogers are provided with a cataloging manual and a style guide. Where possible, these guides reference applicable standards (e.g. CCO or AACRII).
In general, catalogers add titles (usually supplied by the cataloger), classification, dimensions, full-text descriptions, historical notes (with bibliographic sources), extent, condition reports, attributes (e.g. materials, techniques), dates, copyright information, and what the Museum's CMS calls "relationships." All vocabularies and authorities are accessed through once central location rather than from fields in the catalog record itself. Names, film and television titles, publications, etc. are all added through the relationships interface.
Pros: Attributes are tied to classification, so catalogers are encouraged to fill out the correct information based on what an object is (e.g. gauge for a camera, technique for a photograph).
Cons: Relationships are separate from catalog records. Few fields are repeatable. Dimension is one, non-repeatable free-text field which does not allow the user to specify units or values.
The Cleveland Museum of Art
CMS Demonstration Scenarios
Cataloguing Scenarios
1) How will your system handle the cataloguing of a work of art that is composed of multiple pieces?
2) How can your system be used to catalogue a piece of digital art? Our curator has suggested she would like to see how the works of one of the following artists: Bruce Nauman, Elmgreen & Dragset, Bill Viola, or Vita Acconci might be catalogued.