Subject: Conservation database structure
Lauren Robinson <lrobinson<-at->mcny<.>org> writes >We are looking at a proposal for the conservation module in our >database. The proposal currently separates the following into four >fields: Proposed Treatment, Proposed Materials, Treatment, and >Treatment Materials. I'm wondering what other institutions follow >the practice of separating treatment from treatment materials, and >how they find it useful. Any feedback would be appreciated. We have recently received a brand new database from System Simulation Limited that incorporates a conservation module within the collections management database. Whilst most of the database was of a standard collections management form we had some modifications made to the conservation module as we felt it wasn't comprehensive enough. Our priority was to make the database include as much information as we already generate on our objects but also allow us to do really useful searching. We included lots of fields for peoples names and dates, so that all reports have a human and a date attached to them. We have the following fields: Technical elements To describe the condition and existence of the parts of an object like glazing, backboarding and hangings Technical assessment Broken down further into materials and assessment so that you can condition report an object by material, e.g. substrate, gesso, gilding Treatment Recommendation Including whose recommendation and how many hours Condition A single statement that curators can check to see whether an object is fit to loan etc. Conservation treatment priority Uses a numbering system to allow prioritization Next condition check date. Conservation event Broken down further to include what treatment process you are using, a free text area for the treatment report and a materials list Scientific analysis Broken down into lots of components including technical event, reason for analysis, process etc. I would advise that you talk to your supplier as they are generally able to make lots of alterations that probably aren't as expensive as you think. I would also say that whilst collections management databases have been around for a while, not a lot of input has been made by conservators which has led to the resulting solutions being quite clunky at times. Find out exactly what they conservators want to record and talk to the supplier. Caroline Oliver Lead Conservator Guildhall Art Gallery Guildhall Yard London EC2V 5AE *** Conservation DistList Instance 28:44 Distributed: Monday, April 20, 2015 Message Id: cdl-28-44-003 ***Received on Monday, 13 April, 2015