+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: IFA RO only as approved contractors (/showthread.php?tid=4146)
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Steven - 15th December 2011
Martin Locock Wrote:If Jack has found instances when the site records in an archive are deficient or missing, perhaps curators should be checking them as part of the fieldwork monitoring?
Hi
This can (and does) happen where curators are part of the same organisation as the archive/record office and there is sufficient staff.
In terms of digital reports etc. Except for ADS there is no repository for digital archives and they are reliant on funding bodies so aren't necessarily a sustainable model. If there is a move into digital archiving then isn't there likely to be a jump in immediate costs of projects? Also as it's units that are depositing the data wouldn't they be expected to have to pay on-costs to ensure conservation and migration of the data (i.e. a continual commitment to financially supporting the digital archive). Could moving over to digital end the "pay up front for each box you deposit" model now in existence in many museums/archives into a "you deposit, you pay for ever" model. After all how else will the digital archive be sustainable?
Oh and Jack
I really like your passion and I agree with you viewpoint but "mitigation of the development impact"??? Sooooo last century! Surely you mean the "recording and advancing the understanding of the significance of the heritage asset". :face-stir:
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Jack - 15th December 2011
Steven Wrote:
Hi
This can (and does) happen where curators are part of the same organisation as the archive/record office and there is sufficient staff.
In terms of digital reports etc. Except for ADS there is no repository for digital archives and they are reliant on funding bodies so aren't necessarily a sustainable model. If there is a move into digital archiving then isn't there likely to be a jump in immediate costs of projects? Also as it's units that are depositing the data wouldn't they be expected to have to pay on-costs to ensure conservation and migration of the data (i.e. a continual commitment to financially supporting the digital archive). Could moving over to digital end the "pay up front for each box you deposit" model now in existence in many museums/archives into a "you deposit, you pay for ever" model. After all how else will the digital archive be sustainable?
Surely digital archiving (of the wordy bits [for now]) is far cheaper than producing endless paper copies?
Steven Wrote:
Oh and Jack
I really like your passion and I agree with you viewpoint but "mitigation of the development impact"??? Sooooo last century! Surely you mean the "recording and advancing the understanding of the significance of the heritage asset". :face-stir:
Yep
"recording and advancing the understanding of the significance of the heritage asset". Is one way of acieving "mitigation of the development impact"}
IFA RO only as approved contractors - Kel - 15th December 2011
Quote:bane of my life is archives where the museums seem to have 'mislaid' large chunks even when we know they were depositedStaff turnover - or straight loss without replacement - isn't helping. I've even come across this at my entry level of research, looking for prehistoric pottery in a museum archive. It was mentioned in the HER and the new curator was very clear on where it *ought* to have been on the shelves, but there were just gaps where the boxes had been. The exiting curator clearly must've moved it or loaned it for study, but there were no written records relating to it which could be found at the time.