-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: Question regarding practice in describing hand-col maps
Date:   Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:27:52 -0400
From:   [log in to unmask]
To:     [log in to unmask]



Silvana --

You've probably mulled over the same things that I do, including the
application to rule 5C11 in Cartographic Materials, "If a printed item is
hand coloured, state this as hand col. [in the Other physical details of
Physical description (i.e. 300 subfield b)]."  Then it's confusing that
there is a reference to 7B10 when it says that details about color may be
recorded in a note, and one of the examples under 7B10 is simply "?Hand
coloured."  Where it's a pretty straightforward case of a hand-colored map
(and I'm not even trying to figure out whether it was issued hand colored
or not), I just stick with the application to 5C11 and put it in the 300 b,
and I don't make a note about it.  I think a rule application generally
takes precedence over an example, but if catalog users feel the fact of
hand coloring belongs in a note and the 300 field should be as terse as
possible, that's certainly something that we should consider as we do the
new DCRM for cartographic materials.

About making judgments on whether a map was issued hand colored or not, I
found it a little confusing to consider the guidance of LC's Map Cataloging
Manual under "Hand colored" in the Physical Description section of Chapter
2.  When I first read it, I interpreted it as saying that later coloring
should be called "annotated," in a note, but after a while, I realized that
only a certain kind of later color should be considered annotated (like a
map or chart with an individual map user's route highlighted in color).
The sentence that I had trouble interpreting was:  "An item that was issued
and was then colored in a manner unique to the copy, usually for the
owner's use, is annotated."

A question related to yours that I've wondered about relates to master
records and when to create a new record in relation to hand coloring.  I
have to take a closer look at the Differences Between Changes Within
document, but my quick impression was that it says to create a new record
for a colored edition of a map for which there is a record for an uncolored
edition.  But I don't think that specifically addressed early engraved maps
that are hand colored.  And so I've been using master records for uncol.
maps and adapting them for our catalog when we have a hand colored version,
and vice versa.  When I create a new master record, I just describe
whatever we have.  I probably have done things differently over the years,
and I think I remember making a local note on some map records, especially
when I got knowlegeable advice from colleagues that something looked like
modern color, that hand coloring was added at a later date.

I hope I addressed your questions and didn't get too far off onto tangents.
It'll be good to hear what others have to say.

Nancy

Nancy A. Kandoian
Map Cataloger
The Lionel Pincus and Princess Firyal Map Division
The New York Public Library
5th Ave. & 42nd St.
New York, NY  10018-2788

[log in to unmask]
phone 212-930-0586; fax 212-930-0027







         Question regarding practice in describing hand-col maps


         Maps-L Moderator for Silvana
                                    to:
                                      MAPS-L
                                                              03/19/2009 04:18 PM




         Sent by:
               "Maps, Air Photo & Geospatial Systems Forum"
               <[log in to unmask]>
        Please respond to maps-l









-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Question regarding practice in describing hand-col maps
Date:   Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:08:25 -0700
From:   [log in to unmask]
To:     MAPS-L <[log in to unmask]>



Hello,
As a new cataloger of mostly pre-20th cent. cartographic materials I am
trying to
figure out where exactly to include the term "hand-col." for maps that
are issued
hand-col (wash and/or outline). Also how to use the term in describing
maps hand-col. after
issue. Including "hand-col." in 300b and using col. in 300b w/500 detail
note both seem to be
valid options. So, I'd just like to know if one practice is prescribed
or preferred over the other
and what current applications might be.

Any thoughts would be most appreciated.
-Silvana