Conservation DistList Archives [Date] [Subject] [Author] [SEARCH]

Subject: Fixed field coding of master negatives

Fixed field coding of master negatives

From: Nancy Elkington <bl.nee>
Date: Wednesday, April 3, 1991
A few thoughts from the RLG perspective:

A clarification on Julie's concern about exchange of microform data: RLG
*does* send to OCLC RLIN records containing A generations as well as
those containing B generations (where there is no A) in the regular
monthly tape.

I can sympathize with Julie Page's concerns about the adequate storage
of master negatives but the real question here is whether a *camera*
negative can or should be considered identical to a *master* negative.
If the films being produced are not guaranteed to be stored adequately,
should the fact that an institution has filmed an item but inadequately
stored the resulting camera negative prevent another institution from
filming that title and storing the master negative properly?  The
concept of "duplication of effort" really only applies when two
institutions create an identical product, which doesn't seem to be the
case here.

In the early 1980's, when the 007 field was first incorporated into the
MARC format and installed in RLIN, a number of institutions had to make
just these hard decisions about how to code the film they had been
producing for several years.  As you might expect, many of those who had
reservations about the storage of their film decided to code those
negatives as generation b while others did not.  For filming projects
that have been undertaken within the RLG umbrella, all negatives are
stored centrally and in a facility that meets the storage standard.  It
is my understanding that NEH requires that negatives produced with their
funding must also be stored properly.

As to how many times a master negative may be used for printing purposes
while still retaining the designation "master", I'm not sure that anyone
has ever defined it.  Within RLG, we assume that the master negative
will be used only once in the foreseeable future: to create the second
generation printing negative.  The positive service copy is made from
the printing negative.  If the printing negative is damaged at some
point in the future, the master negative would then be used to create a
second printing negative.

A final note on standard terminology:

According to the USMARC Bibliographic standard for field 007, byte 11,
these are the way the generations are coded (direct quote):


 a   First generation (master) Code a indicates a first generation. The
     first generation is the camera master or COM recorder master. Code
     a is used for all master films that are made on archival stock in
     accordance with archival productions standards and that are given
     archival storage under relevant ANSI/AIIM standards.

 b   Printing master Code b indicates a printing master which is a
     microform of any generation employed mainly for the production of
     other microforms.  Code b is used for all masters that are not
     manufactured, produced, and stored in accordance with archival
     standards.  (I would argue for the use of the term "camera
     negative" in place of "masters" here)

 c   Service copy Code c indicates a service copy which is a
     microform from another microform that is intended primarily for use
     rather than for production of other microforms.  Microopaques are
     always coded c in this element.

                  Conservation DistList Instance 4:53
                  Distributed: Thursday, April 4, 1991
                        Message Id: cdl-4-53-001
Received on Wednesday, 3 April, 1991

[Search all CoOL documents]