Problem CDs

I am in the process of sorting and labeling CDs that have been transferred from cassette. Eventually the reference copies will be shelved in the library and the masters in the archives.   

The following are CDs that have various problems involving labels, master and reference copies: 

1991-04-00_80: missing master and reference 2 of 2

1991-09-00_203 and 1992-04-00_314 and 1992-02-08_88 : no master copies

1992-04-00_314a-d: no reference copies

1991-10-00_202: missing master 1 of 2

1991-09-00_203: missing reference 1 of 2

1992-02-00_297: includes master copies 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, but only has reference labeled 1 of 1

1992-03-00_273: includes reference copies 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, but only has master labeled 1 of 1

1991-03-00_294: two copies of master 1 of 2, but no reference copies

1990-10-18_4: confusion in numbering–labels are as follows: master 1 of 1, duplicate master 1 of 1, master 2 of 2, reference 1 of 1

and more…

 1994-04-00_315: no reference copies

1994-05-07_540: missing reference copy 2 of 2. Master is unmarked (1 of 2 or 2 of 2?)

1994-10-13_650: missing reference copy 1 of 2

2001-03-31_1055: no master

2001-02-02_1039: no master

2000-11-02_970: no master

2000-11-30_961: no master

1997-03-08_681: This CD is labeled 1 of 4, but it is all by itself. There are no other reference copies and no masters.

1995-05-07_540: missing reference 1 of 2

1995-05-25_829: includes master 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, but reference is labeled 1 of 1

1996-11-17_678: missing master 3 of 3

1995-05-04_87: no reference copies

–Alex

Alternate Title (246)

We should discuss how best to use this field.  See guidelines for field 246:

http://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/2xx/246.shtm

–CMW

How to indicate dates for previously recorded material

The date of publication for the media carrier being cataloged should be indicated in the “Date of Publication” 260c field. The original date on which a recording was made should be indicated in the “Date/Time and Place of Event” 518 field.

Per “Organizing Audiovisual and Electronic Resources for Access” by Ingrid Hsieh-Yee:

The publication date of the edition in hand is the third element for Area 4 [MARC field 260] and is entered in subfield $c. If an item contains multiple dates, publication date is preferred to copyright date or printing date. If a publication date is not available, the cataloger will use the copyright date. AACR2r offers an option to include both the publication date and the copyright date if they are different. The Library of Congress decided in 1989 that it would not apply this option to monographs or print serials. (pg. 19)

Proper Nouns

QUESTION:

When cataloging titles, only the first word of a title and proper nouns within that title are capitalized. What qualify as proper nouns? Do the names of recurring festivals or events qualify (e.g. The Bridge Walk or Showcase)? Do the names of internal programs qualify (e.g. Poetry in The Branches)?

ANSWER:

Standardization

We need to standardize the authorities in our database; a search for “Eliot, T.S.” brings up two records, while one for “Eliot, Thomas Stearns” brings up another.

We need to edit all records in our database to reflect the name and subject headings given in the LC Authority files. This is a major project, but one which we should strive to complete by summer’s end.

If the title on the box reads “T.S. Eliot Reading ‘Four Quartets’,” how should we render that in the title field? (See record 1411.)

T.S. Eliot reading Four quartets.

To do

Check out Harvard or other records of the Dylan Thomas tape, to see how they handle the various authors.

Check out OCLC for records for duplicates.

Also: catalog the next tape under 1403, and then skip to 1410.

More questions/problems

How should we indicate that we are unsure of the running time?

If one poet is reading works by numerous poets, how should we indicate the various authorship? Do we include it in the “Formatted Contents” field, in a general note, or elsewhere? (See “Dylan Thomas reading.”)

In what fields, or in what cases, do we NOT use a period? For instance, do we put a period after the “Old Number”? (So far, I have not.)

What if the date cannot be determined? (See the Jack Gilbert tape.)

After an author’s name and birthdate (eg. “Kinnell, Galway, 1927 – “), where do you put the period? (Is there a space between the hyphen and the period?)

For the time, do we write “minutes.,” or “min.,” or something else?

If we already have a record for a CD version of a recording, what should we do with the cassette version?

Questions and Problems from Mike’s first day of Cataloging

What’s the best way to determine if an item is a duplicate?

Press the find button to call up a blank database page. Enter keywords into appropriate fields, e.g. “Pablo Neruda Reads” in the title field. Then hit enter. This should call up any related records. It may be necessary to do a couple of different kinds of finds to determine whether the item is already in the collection.

Do we catalog duplicates separately? (That is, do two copies of the same title get two separate records in the catalog?)

We do not catalog duplicates separately. Note the presence of an additional media carrier (and the type of media carrier) in the “Additional Copies” field and set aside.

If a title has more than one copyright date, which one do we use?

Use the copyright date related to the media carrier in-hand. If the recording is a reissue, note the earlier copyright date in the “General Note” field. (We should look into whether this is standard practice and possibly amend this.)

What’s the difference between a “Subject Added Entry” (600 field) and an “Added Entry” (700 field)?

Library cataloging systems are generally not capable of performing keyword searches across fields. Thus there is a certain amount of redundancy in cataloging — the cataloger must fill out fields related to particular search criteria. 600 fields contain subject information. According to OCLC’s cataloging handbook:

Use fields 700–730 to provide additional access to a bibliographic record from names and/or titles having various relationships to the item you are cataloging. Added entries are made for persons, corporate bodies and meetings having some form of responsibility for the creation of the work. This includes intellectual and publishing responsibilities.

Use fields 700–730 also for added entries for other titles under authority control related to the work for which the record is made (e.g., other editions). Added entries are assigned to records for persons, corporate bodies, meetings and titles which are not given access through subject or series entries.

How do I save a record?

FileMaker automatically saves your work. This means any change you make to a field is a permanent change, so be aware of accidental keystrokes.

Is it necessary to put a “Restricted Access” note, like “For library use only”?

Yes, going forward this will be a very important piece of information. As of now, all materials are “For library use only”.

Can more than one party be included in the “Main Credits”?

No. If more than one person is on a recording their names should be cataloged alphabetically in the 700 “Added Entry — Personal Name” field and the “Main Credits” field left blank.

What if there is no LC authority record for a personal or corporate author?

That means an LC authority record may not exist. Use your best judgment for cataloging the names of these entities. No birth or death date is necessary.

For the corporate author (710 field) and the “Name of the Production Company” (260b), should I use the name of the publisher (eg. HarperCollins) or of the imprint (eg. Caedmon)?

What do we do about copies of commercial recordings?

For preservation purposes we create duplicate copies of commercial recordings for which only one copy exists in the collection.

The Epic of Poets House

Greetings, fellow Poets House multimedia digitizers and catalogers!  I thought it’d be a good idea to start a blog, where we could gather all of our favorite links and post any questions, answers, discoveries, and spontaneous sestinas we think worthy of this precious wordpress space.  It seems to me a good way to keep a running record of our process, so that ultimately we’ll have some good notes to draw from when we etch our digitization guide in stone.  Sound like a good idea?