Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:52:32.596Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Classifying photography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2016

Lynda Bunting  and
Ani Matosian
Lynda Bunting*
Affiliation:
Blum & Poe, 2727 S. La Cienega Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90034, USA
Ani Matosian*
Affiliation:
Research Library, Getty Research Institute, 1200 Getty Center Drive, Suite 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90049-1688, USA
*
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Photography has long been a part of the Library of Congress classification tables. At the time of its inclusion, photography was not considered an art form and thus was placed in the T – Technology schedule instead of the N – Fine Arts schedule. This article will discuss various aspects of photography classification, including its history, the reasons behind and development of alternative schedules, the challenges of classifying artists’ books with a photographic basis, and the feasibility of maintaining alternative schedules with the proliferation of shelf-ready books.

Type
Research Article
Information
Art Libraries Journal , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , 2011 , pp. 44 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © The Art Libraries Society 2011

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. Parr, Martin and Badger, Gerry, Thephotobook: a history, vol. I (London: Phaidon Press, 2004), 61.Google Scholar
2. Dewey, Melvii, A classification and subject index for cataloguing and arranging the books and pamphlets of a library (Amherst, MA., 1876), 20.Google Scholar
3. Sayers, W.C. Berwick, A manual of classification for librarians and bibliographers (London: Graf ton & Co., 1944), 152.Google Scholar
4. Freitag, W.M., ‘ARLIS/NA at twenty-five: a reminiscence,’ Art documentation 16, no. 2 (Fall 1997): 15–19. ‘...the placing of photography books in the T (technology) classification was another [problem]. We lobbied for a change and were fortunate that LC’s chief subject cataloger, Ed Blume, saw things our way.. .Due to his advocacy, LC decide to offer an alternative to the T-Class that could be used by libraries that desired to classify and house photography in closer proximity to the other visual arts. Together with Bill Walker, ARLIS/NA charter member and past president, Blume developed Class NH as an optional classification for photography as a fine art medium. This was a boon to art libraries, especially in those university library systems where traditionally such departmental libraries were responsible for collecting in fields congruent with segments of the LC classification. Now they were at least able to keep their books on photography under the roof of the art library rather than having to consult them in the main or engineering libraries.’Google Scholar
5. Crimp, Douglas, ‘The museum’s old, the library’s new subject’, in The photography reader, ed. by Wells, Liz (New York: Routledge, 2003), 423. For more on the topic, see also Parr and Badger, vol.1, p.11.Google Scholar
6. Bunting, Lynda and Matosian, Ani, rev., NH Classification Schedule for Artistic Photography, rev.ed.2004, http://www.arlisna.org/pubs/onlinepubs/NHschedule.pdf.Google Scholar
7. Nelson, Robert S., ‘The map of art history,’ Art bulletin 79, no. 1 (March 1997): 28–40, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3046228.Google Scholar
8. See note 3 on Cuttering on p.25 of the article by Sherman Clarke in this issue of the ALJ.Google Scholar
9. Thurmann-Jajes, Anna, Arsphotographica: Fotografie und Künstlerbücher (Bremen: Neues Museum Weserburg Bremen, 2002), 20. ‘It is possible to say that half of all the artists’ books produced to date have been based on photographs.’ The authors of this article think this estimate is high, but her point that there are substantial numbers is well taken.Google Scholar
10. The precise origins of the term are a little murky, but it was first widely used in an exhibition simply titled Artists books, held at Moore College of Art Gallery in 1973 and curated by Diane Vanderlip.Google Scholar
11. We will not discuss here whether or not these books should be in locked stacks and other physical housing issues, which can affect shelving order.Google Scholar
12. Ayers, Sheila, ‘The outsourcing of cataloging: the effect on libraries,’ Current studies in librarianship 27, no. 1/2 (Spring/Fall 2003): 17.Google Scholar
13. Shedenhelm, Laura D. and Burk, Bartley A., ‘Book vendor records in the OCLC database: boon or bane?’ Library resources & technical services 45, no. 1 (January 2001): 10–19.Google Scholar
14. ‘OCLC Contract Cataloging, Request for cost proposal for non-Dewey projects,’ http://www.oclc.org/us/en/contractcataloging/ordering/costproposal_nondewey.pdf.Google Scholar