Barbara, Yes. It helps. Thanks for your explanation both in theory and practice.
Thanks again. Joan Wang Illinois Heartland Library System On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:13 AM, Barbara Tillett <babstill...@me.com> wrote: > Each resource contains intellectual or artistic content and there are > relationships between the essence of that content and the > person/family/corporate body responsible for it. The basic work in the > FRBR sense is still there in the photograph, and FRBR makes a relationship > between that contained work and how it is expressed (communicated) and then > how it is packaged (manifestation), as different points of view for that > resource - I would suggest: don't think in terms of separate records for > works, expressions, manifestations, and items - they are all points of view > of a resource. > > "Contributors" to an expression are the important > people/families/corporate bodies responsible for that aspect - > communicating the contained work in a new way. That may be through > communicating text in a different language, slightly updating or adjusting > a text through a revision, through viewing an image in a new color or > communicating that image in a new way. > > However, when that communication of a work transforms the work into a new > work, we should be recognizing that in our cataloging rules (and I think we > do). There is what I call a magic line where we say the content is > altered so much it has become the work of another creator and related to > the original work (we've done this in cataloging rules for centuries)- we > already do that with music - where a performer is a contributor until > he/she modifies the music he/she perform so much it is his/her own work > based on the original work - or for motion pictures where we declare the > result is so modified, it is a new work. > > I would say we have the same situation with a work of art and a > photographer - If that photographer is faithfully portraying the original > work, the role is a contributor expressing the original work. If the > photographer uses an original work to produce something new - different > colors, perspectives, a collage of images, etc. - then a new work exists, > and that photographer is a creator of that new work. > > Does that help? > > Dr. Barbara B. Tillett > Chair, Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA > jscch...@rdatoolkit.org > > On Mar 8, 2013, at 11:16 AM, Joan Wang wrote: > > I agree with Sara. Honestly, I think about the question the whole morning. > Finally I feel that a photography of an original artistic work should be a > new work and expression. I did a hesitation on " a new work". But it is > very hard to say that photographing is not an individual artistic content > creation. Any more thoughts? > > Thanks, > Joan Wang > Illinois Heartland Library System > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Elizabeth O'Keefe > <eoke...@themorgan.org>wrote: > >> 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 >> > > > > -- > Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D. > Cataloger -- CMC > Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office) > 6725 Goshen Road > Edwardsville, IL 62025 > 618.656.3216x409 > 618.656.9401Fax > > > -- Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D. Cataloger -- CMC Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office) 6725 Goshen Road Edwardsville, IL 62025 618.656.3216x409 618.656.9401Fax
