Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:19:09.644Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Security in the art library

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2016

Gaye Smith
Gaye Smith*
Affiliation:
Manchester Polytechnic Library
Get access

Abstract

The nature of much material in the art library poses problems of security. Types of material at risk are discussed. Solutions to security are considered: closed access, electronic security devices, owner identification and provision of good photocopying facilities. Efficient library administration (including regular stock checking and enforcing of sanctions) is essential. Planning the library for security is considered. Security is an expensive but important responsibility of the art librarian.

Type
Research Article
Information
Art Libraries Journal , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , Spring 1980 , pp. 26 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © The Art Libraries Society 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

(1) For storage of original photographs see: Pacey, Philip. Art Library Manual: a guide to resources and practice. London: Bowker, 1977. pp.311–312.Google Scholar
(2) For storage of manuscript documents see: Pacey, Philip. Art Library Manual: a guide to resources and practice. London: Bowker, 1977. p.209.Google Scholar
(3) Archives of American Art Journal. New York: Archives of American Art. Quarterly 1960-Google Scholar
McCoy, Garnett. Archives of American Art: a directory of resources. New York: Bowker, 1972.Google Scholar
Archives of American Art. A checklist of the collection. 2nd ed. revised. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1977.Google Scholar
(4) At Manchester Polytechnic students are encouraged to use paints and drawing equipment in the library. Rare items can be protected by a sheet of polythene or plastic book jacket.Google Scholar
(5) Pacey, Philip. Art Library Manual: a guide to resources and practice. London: Bowker, 1977. p.401.Google Scholar
(6) Rogerson, Ian. Sir Francis Meynell and the Nonesuch Press. Manchester: Manchester Polytechnic Library, 1979.Google Scholar
(7) For an excellent summary of Checkpoint, Gaylord, General Nucleonics Library Bureau, 3M and Knogo systems see: Knight, Nancy H. Theft detection systems for libraries: a survey. Library Technology Reports, vol. 12, November 1976. pp.576–690.Google Scholar
(8) For a description of the latest systems available from 3M, Checkpoint, Gaylord, Knogo and Sentronic International see: Knight, Nancy H. Library security systems come of age. American Libraries, vol. 9, April 1978, pp.229–232.Google ScholarPubMed
(9) Basker, Robert N. Library security systems. New Library World, vol. 81, no. 955, January 1980.Google Scholar
(10) Sheridan, Robert N. Measuring book disappearance: how to evaluate the need for collection protection. Library Journal, vol. 99, no. 15, September 1974, pp.2040–2043.Google Scholar
(11) Cossar, Bruce, 3M Tattle tape: the eye that never sleeps. Canadian Library Journal, vol. 32, no. 3, June 1975, pp.213–5.Google Scholar
(12) Murfin, Marjorie E. and Hendrick, Clyde. Ripoffs tell their story: interviews with mutilators in a university library. Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 1, no. 2, May 1975, pp.8–12.Google Scholar
(13) Culp, Robert W. Thefts, mutilators and library exhibits. Special Libraries, vol. 67, no. 12, December 1976, pp.582–584.Google Scholar
(14) Kesler, Elizabeth Gates. A campaign against mutilation. Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 3, no. 1, March 1977, pp.29–30.Google Scholar
(15) Morley, William F.E. Security or defacement – owner identification marks in rare books. Canadian Library Journal, vol. 35, no. 6. December 1978, pp.421–425.Google Scholar
(16) Niland, Powell and Kurth, William H. Estimating lost volumes in a university library collection. College and Research Libraries, vol. 37, no. 2, March 1976, pp.128–136.Google Scholar