[PADG:2259] RE: Theses and Dissertations

["Baird, Brian J" <bbaird@xxxxxxxxx>]

At the risk of asking a stupid question, can someone (maybe Scott) tell me why you are producing fiche (which no one will want to use) at 4-5 times the cost of what it would take to print a paper copy on archival paper and library bind it?  I would argue that an archival paper copy will last longer than the fiche copy.  I can sort of understand the space issues, but not completely.  It is just a mystery to me.  

Brian Baird 

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Brian J. Baird
Preservation Librarian
University of Kansas
134 Watson Library
1425 Jayhawk Blvd.
Lawrence, KS 66045-7544
(785) 864-3568
fax: (785) 864-5311
bbaird@xxxxxx
www2.lib.ku.edu/preservation


 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Scott Devine [mailto:Scott_Devine@xxxxxxxx] 
Sent:	Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:36 PM
To:	padg@xxxxxxx
Subject:	[PADG:2258] RE: Theses and Dissertations

Yes.  ProQuest is producing the fiche using the Image Graphics e-beam technology
-- at least that was the case last summer when the most recent batch was
processed.  The cost is about $55 per title.

"Cybulski, Walter (NIH/NLM)" wrote:

> Scott:  I am assuming that when you say "we" you mean ProQuest is producing
> the fiche.  Is the fiche being produced using Image Graphics e-beam
> technology?  Thanks.
> - Walter Cybulski
> National Library of Medicine
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Devine [mailto:Scott_Devine@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 2:17 PM
> To: padg@xxxxxxx
> Subject: [PADG:2255] RE: Theses and Dissertations
>
> NCSU Libraries has been accepting electronic-only copies of theses and
> dissertations since December 2002 (i.e., we no longer accept print copies).
> In addition to maintaining the electronic documents, we produce
> computer-output microfiche (housed in special collections/university
> archives) for each title.  As the University's archival repository for
> theses and dissertations, we were not ready to rely on the electronic
> version as an archival copy nor were we willing to rely on any vendor as the
> sole repository for our theses and dissertations.
>
> Julian Stam wrote:
>
> > We investigated changing the BC collection policy on print copies, but
> > abandoned the idea of eliminating them (for now).
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-padg@xxxxxxx [mailto:owner-padg@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > Patricia P. Selinger
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 12:01 PM
> > To: PADG
> > Subject: [PADG:2250] Theses and Dissertations
> >
> > I am interested to know if any institutions are using, or are thinking
> > about using, UMI/ProQuest as the sole repository for theses and
> > dissertations.  (That is, abandoning print copies.)  Is anyone using
> > their "Current Research @" database as the sole electronic access to
> > theses and/or dissertations?
> >
> > --
> > Patricia Palmer Selinger
> > Head, Preservation Department
> >
> > Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries
> > Box 842033
> > 901 Park Avenue
> > Richmond, VA  23284-2033
> > patricia.selinger@xxxxxxx
> > (ph)   804.828.1096
> > (fax)  804.828.0151
> >
>
> --
> Scott W. Devine
> Head, Preservation Department
> North Carolina State University Libraries
> Campus Box 7111
> Raleigh, NC 27695-7111
> Tel. 919.513.1226
> Fax. 919.515.7292
> http://www.lib.ncsu.edu

--
Scott W. Devine
Head, Preservation Department
North Carolina State University Libraries
Campus Box 7111
Raleigh, NC 27695-7111
Tel. 919.513.1226
Fax. 919.515.7292
http://www.lib.ncsu.edu