Dear Regine,
I think this is a nice application of FRBRoo to a more museum-like context.
The Work discussion is an old one. Both positions are justified. Therefore
FRBRoo defines an "Individual Work" in contrast to a "Complex Work".
In practice, i'd suggest instantiating the "Individual Work" can be
ommitted, once it can
be inferred, as we had proposed to Europeana.
I'd argue, the distinction "they are sometimes considered as a new
visual work, sometimes just as modification" is pointless,
because there is a new artistic contribution. The expression is new. The
Work gets another realization. The plate is
physically modified. The feature on it, the scratches, are new. An
Expression cannot be modified.
The "invenit" can be associated with the work conception, but is an
expression in its own right. The "FECIT" has its own artistic
contribution, I'd argue it is a derivative.
But there are better FRBR experts on this list!
I think it will be good to create a guideline for this case. I believe
it should be discussed together with the bronze casting
work.
All the best,
Martin
On 3/8/2015 11:23 πμ, Regine Stein wrote:
Hi,
Apparently my message didn't pass through on Friday (since it was too
big, apparently due to the citations of E12 and F32 in Martin's email,
I removed them now) so I try it again - best, Regine
-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [Crm-sig] FRBRoo / CRM for prints?
Datum: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:33:14 +0200
Von: Stein, Regine <[email protected]>
An: [email protected], [email protected]
Kopie (CC): Gudrun Knaus <[email protected]>
Dear Christian-Emil, dear Martin,
Many thanks for your responses!
Our interest is indeed to understand the whole process of artistic
printing (firstly in early modern Europe), how the idea of a visual
work evolved in the process, what are the relationships between the
various (conceptual and physical) objects involved in the process.
Making a printing plate always starts with a drawing which may either
be a copy of an existing visual work, a painting, or may be
intentionally designed for a print, either by the printmaker or by
another artist. In German language we typically use in documentation
the roles "Inventor" and "Stecher", according to the Latin "INVENIT"
and "FECIT" which one can often find in inscriptions (see e.g.
engravings by Marcantonio Raimondi with inscription "RAPHA URBI INVEN
/ MAF" - Raphael invented it / Marcantonio fecit = Marcantonio made
it). Then, the same visual idea may be realized in several printing
plates. Then, we have prints from different states of this same
printing plate, and they are sometimes considered as a new visual
work, sometimes just as modification. In order to limit the number of
copies a printing plate may be scratched. If we are lucky the
printing plate still exists somewhere but obviously in its last state,
and earlier states are only known through the prints. Then prints may
be compiled into series and so on.
As we are dealing with multiples we wonder if FRBRoo is appropriate to
approach this, our questions include:
- Should we consider multiple realizations of the same drawing in
various printing plates as multiple F2 Expression (F24 Publication
Expression) of the same F1 Work (F14 Individual Work)? Or are they all
different works?
- Should we consider different states of one printing plate as F3
Manifestation Product Type?
- How to reflect the different states of the printing plate as "used
specific object" in E12 Production?
- Analysis of what is typically recorded in the documentation in a
museum holding one (or multiple) print(s): which information pertains
to the Work / Expression (e.g. the subject / P62 depicts), which to
the printing plate / F3 Manifestation Product Type (e.g. the state),
which to the actual museum object / F4 Item?
We are grateful for further comments on this, and will certainly be
back to the group as we move on.
Btw, the AAT of course differentiates
"prints (visual works)" -> http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300041273
- or more specifically "engravings (prints)" ->
http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300041340
"printing plates" -> http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300022755
as well as the process of "engraving (printing process)" ->
http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300053225
Best wishes
Regine
Am 30.07.2015 um 21:58 schrieb martin:
Dear Regine,
There has been an implicit discussion in the CRM about prints as
production with particular tools.
see:
E12 Production
[...]
§Rembrandt’s creating of the seventh state of his etching “Woman
sitting half dressed beside a stove”, 1658, identified by Bartsch
Number 197 (E12,E65,E81)
So, the print plate undergoes "transformations" and implies the
creation of an information object being present on the plate(s) and
the prints, or, in more creative techniques, the information content
of the plate is "incorporated" in the prints.
The print plate is "used specific object" in the printing process,
but a specialization of E12 may be adequate to fix the
specific kind of use and its consequences of information transfer to
the copies.
We are also discussing a generalization of
F32 Carrier Production Event
[...]
into industrial production, of cars, tools, coins and whatever.
Artistic prints with limited copies etc may not be regarded as
producing "things of type XXX".
A CRM extension into the world of artitstic printing may be interesting.
If its only about using AAT vocabulary, Christian-Emil's remark's
should be sufficient.
I do not know if the AAT differentiates the plate as museum object
from the copy.
All the best,
Martin
On 30/7/2015 9:48 μμ, Christian-Emil Smith Ore wrote:
Hi Regine
If I understand AAT correctly, it is a thesaurus and is as such a hierarchy of
concepts and can be seen as a incarnation of a hierarchy under the E55 Type.
In a CRM/FRBRoo context a print is a physical object (one of the items of a
series), for instance a lithography, a paper carrying an image or more. A
lithography would usually be given the AAT type 'print' (or belong to this
type/be a member of the set of objects that can be said to belong to the
hypothetical set of all prints).
This may not be what you have in mind?
Regards,
Christian-Emil
-----Original Message-----
From: Crm-sig [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Stein,
Regine
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 3:06 PM
To:[email protected];[email protected]
Cc: Gudrun Knaus
Subject: [Crm-sig] FRBRoo / CRM for prints?
Hi,
Did anybody go into depth with FRBRoo / CRM modelling or mapping for
prints (visual works) (->http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300041273 ;-)) , or can
point us to respective work on this kind of material?
Thanks!
Regine
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr | Vox:+30(2810)391625 |
Research Director | Fax:+30(2810)391638 |
| Email: [email protected] |
|
Center for Cultural Informatics |
Information Systems Laboratory |
Institute of Computer Science |
Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH) |
|
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton, |
GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece |
|
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl |
--------------------------------------------------------------
