Hi Liz and others, As it happens, I gave this exact problem a great deal of thought about 30 years ago. It was long before FRBR of course, but the issue itself has not changed. At the time I argued that reproductions were new works, and for describing the relationship between the original and the reproduction/image as "Represented Work."
I'm now committing the scholarly sin of self-citation-- but in case it might be useful, this is the article that I wrote on this topic: Shatford, Sara. Describing a picture: a thousand words are seldom cost effective. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, Vol. 44(4), Summer 1984, p. 13-30. Sara Sara Shatford Layne Principal Cataloger UCLA Library Cataloging & Metadata Center sla...@library.ucla.edu ________________________________________ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Elizabeth O'Keefe [eoke...@themorgan.org] Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 4:31 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Reproductions of Art Works and FRBR Several months ago, there was a discussion on the PCCList about whether it was appropriate to add an access point for: [Artist]. Works. Selections to a printed monograph that includes reproductions of the artist's work. The use of conventional collective titles is well-established for compilations of textual works, but prior to RDA, headings of this kind were never applied to monographs illustrated with reproductions of art works. Catalogers of art-related materials felt the headings were confusing and unhelpful. The Cataloging Advisory Committee of ARLIS has held several discussions about this topic, and is considering, among other issues, the FRBR justification for the practice. We are uncertain about how FRBR would characterize the relationship between an art work and a reproduction of that work, and would welcome comments from readers of this list on questions such as: Is a reproduction an expression of the art work? A manifestation of the art work? Or is it an expression or manifestation of a different work that is related to the art work? If the reproduction is in turn reproduced in another medium, such as a printed monograph, what is the relationship between the art work, the photographic reproduction of that art work, and the photomechanical reproduction of that reproduction presented in the printed work? And is the FRBR relationship affected by the content type--in other words, will the FRBR relationships for a reproduction of a photograph of a drawing be different from the FRBR relationships for a reproduction of a photograph of a three-dimensional object? Any thoughts you choose to share on this vexing topic will be much appreciated. Liz O'Keefe Elizabeth O'Keefe Director of Collection Information Systems The Morgan Library & Museum 225 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016-3405 TEL: 212 590-0380 FAX: 212-768-5680 NET: eoke...@themorgan.org Visit CORSAIR, the Library’s comprehensive collections catalog, now on the web at http://corsair.themorgan.org
