Jump to content

Cultural property documentation

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Crystal Stein (talk | contribs) at 18:48, 24 April 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the {{User sandbox}} template. The documentation of cultural property is a critical aspect of collections care. As stewards of cultural property, museums collect and preserve not only objects but the research and documentation connected to those objects, in order to more effectively care for them. Documenting cultural heritage is a collaborative effort. Essentially, registrars, collection managers, conservators, and curators all contribute to the task of recording and preserving information regarding collections. There are two main types of documentation museums are responsible for: records generated in the registration process--accessions, cataloging, etc. and information regarding research on the object and its historical significance. Properly maintaining both types of documentation is vital to preserving cultural heritage.[1]

Brief History

Practices for recording information about museum collections began developing in the late eighteenth century. Early collection control systems evolved from library prototypes, borrowing the idea of a sequential numbering system and accession ledgers to connect objects to information about them. In the mid 1900s, formal registration training programs began appearing, and standards for documenting cultural collections were established. It was not until the late 1990s when computers became commonplace that any other major breakthroughs occurred in the documentation and object tracking methods of museums.

Cataloging standards

Adhering to cataloging standards while creating and maintaining documentation is necessary for uniformity and accessibility. "Standards not only promote the recording of information consistently but are also fundamental to retrieving it efficiently. They promote data sharing, improve content management, and reduce redundant efforts. In time, the accumulation of consistently documented records across multiple repositories will increase access to content by maximizing research results. Ultimately, uniform documentation will promote the development of a body of cultural heritage information that will greatly enhance research and teaching in the arts and humanities."[2] Standards can dictate processes like numbering and measuring, as well as data entry methods like choosing which categories of information to include (metadata sets), which words to use (thesauri and authority lists), and how to format data content.

Numbering/ Marking

Numbering and marking an object (usually with the object's accession number) is part of the initial cataloging process, which also includes standard procedures for measuring, photographing, and examining the condition of objects. Marking an object with its accession number (or temporary number if the object will not become part of the permanent collection) is how the object is identified and linked to its documentation. In order to track museum collections, to differentiate between permanent, loan, and subsidiary collections, and most importantly to provide access to the documentation of objects in the collection, it is vital that a systematic numbering scheme be used and that each unique number is marked or tagged on the objects and prominently noted on all documentation associated with the objects. There are many ways to mark objects with their numbers. Depending on the type of object and desired permanence of the mark, some of the preferred methods include: archival quality paper tags with pencil, barrier coat with ink or paint, adhered labels, labels sewn with cotton tape, Reemay, or Tyvek, pencil directly on object (recommended for paper and photographs mostly), and Bar codes/RFID technology.

Categories and Authority Lists

Another way of controlling collections information to promote accessibility is utilizing standard formats of required data elements and preferred terminology when describing and documenting works of art, architecture, and cultural artifacts, as well as images of these things.[3] There are numerous guides available for determining which descriptive information is necessary to an object file and how to format that information for ease of accessibility--Categories for the Description of Works of Art (CDWA), Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO), etc. There are also a number of authority lists and thesauri available to documentation professionals, which can be very helpful in choosing preferred terminology in describing cultural objects. The Getty Research Institute has created comprehensive vocabularies, including The Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT), The Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names (TGN), The Cultural Objects Name Authority (CONA), and The Union List of Artist Names (ULAN). Other valuable tools for professionals documenting cultural property are the CAMEO and American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works' Lexicon Project, which are collaborative efforts designed to define and standardize terms used in the description of objects and materials used to conserve objects.

Types of documentation

A comprehensive object file contains many different types of documentation, following the object through its life cycle. Some of the various events or facets of an object's life that require documentation are listed below:[4]

Accessions

Acquiring objects, whether temporarily for loan or consideration or permanently for the collection, requires a great deal of documentation. Legal stuff-accepting responsibility for care.[5] Before an object even arrives at an institution, the first piece of documentation produced is an Initial Custody Agreement. This document contains contact information for the owner/source of the object; intention for the outcome of this transaction--gift, loan, purchase, or bequest; responsibilities for insurance, packing, and shipping; and a description of the object.[6] If the object is to be formally accessioned into the permanent collection, a Transfer of Title will also be required upon the object's arrival. The documentation required for a transfer of title could be a Deed of Gift or a sale slip. As part of the standard accessioning process, condition reports will also be created, numbers will be assigned and marked, and photographs will be taken. These initial documents are the beginning of the object's file. If supplementary documentation, such as Donor and Provenance Questionnaires and research files pertaining to the object's history or context/art historical significance are available, they should also be included in the file as well. Documentation of the provenance of a work of art has long been a valuable component of art historical research. In addition to providing insight into the history of art collecting, it can serve as a way to authenticate an object and determine conservation priorities.[7]

Inventories

The creation and maintenance of a reliable, accurate, and up-to-date inventory is critical to any collecting institution.[8]

Loans & Exhibitions

1. Loan Agreement

2. Condition Reports

[9]

3. Packing instructions and shipping receipts

Diagrams


Conservation Treatment

1. Proposals

Part of pre-treatment documentation[10]

2. Examination

3. Reports

Part of post-treatment documentation

4. Photographs

Before, actual state, and after


Curatorial/ Art Historical Information

Context of object


Risk Management

1. Insurance

Track copyright for legal purposes


Deaccessions

Discussion of each step of consideration, value of object, why it's no longer appropriate for collection[11] [12]

Documenting Contemporary Art

Documenting contemporary art requires a non-traditional approach. As artists increasingly use more ephemeral materials, installations, and digital content to meet their creative needs, the approach to defining the parameters of these new works and how to document them has necessarily evolved. "Traditionally, the documentation of artwork has focused on materiality and issues of authenticity. Materials are undeniably important to the way we understand art. A working knowledge of and familiarity with various media will allow a registrar to forecast storage needs, foster collections care, and recommend exhibition guidelines...but the conceptual core remains the essence of the work. The new challenge is how to effectively document a conceptual work."[13] New strategies for capturing the conceptual core of contemporary artworks include recording perceptions of the work itself, documenting artist questionnaires and interviews to gain insight into intent and philosophy, and recording videos of installation and de-installation processes.

Systems

[14]

CMS

DAM

Preservation

Archives

Backup

Data transfer

Sharing and dissemination

See Also

References

  1. ^ Reibel, D. (2008). Documentation. In Registration Methods for the Small Museum, 4th ed. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.
  2. ^ Baca, M. et al. (2006). Cataloging Cultural Objects: A Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.
  3. ^ Harpring, Patricia. (2009) Cataloging Cultural Objects. Retrieved April 18, 2015. http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies.pdf
  4. ^ Longstreth-Brown, Kittu & R.A. Buck. (2010). Types of Files. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 150-154). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  5. ^ Malaro, Marie C. (2012). The Acquisition of Objects--Accessioning. A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections, (pp. 57-113). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  6. ^ Buck, Rebecca A. (2010). Initial Custody and Documentation. In R.A. Buck and J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 38-43). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  7. ^ Daly, Karen D. (2010). Provenance Research in Museum Collections. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 62-77). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  8. ^ McCormick, Maureen. (2010). Inventory. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 300-306). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  9. ^ Demeroukas, Marie. (2010). Condition Reporting. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp.223-232). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  10. ^ Appelbaum, Barbara. (2010). Documentation and Treatment. In Conservation Treatment Methodology, (pp. 379-417). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
  11. ^ Morris, Martha & Antonia Moser. (2010). Deaccessioning. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore, Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (p. 100-108). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  12. ^ Malaro, Marie. (2012) The Disposal of Objects--Documentation Needed to Support Proposed Deaccessions. A Legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections, (pp. 248-272). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
  13. ^ Schlemmer, Mark B. (2010). Documenting Contemporary Art. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 78-84). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
  14. ^ Quigley, Suzanne & P. Sully. (2010). Computerized Systems. In R.A. Buck & J.A. Gilmore (Eds.), Museum Registration Methods 5th Edition, (pp. 161-183). Washington, DC: AAM Press.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cultural_property_documentation&oldid=659029637"