• Home
  • Project | Partners | Team
    • Project Summary
    • Project Website
    • Site Coordinators
    • Project Participants
    • Project Team
    • Steering Committee
  • Object Thesaurus
    • Controlled Vocabularies
  • HASS Researchers
  • What’s Happening?
    • Project Updates
    • Site Visits
    • Presentations
    • Your Questions
  • Search the MME
  • Guidelines & Data Entry Help
  • Manual Data Entry
  • Upload from Text File
  • Publish/Unpublish & Export
  • Update account details/change password
  • Data Entry, Upload & other features
  • Defining a Collection
  • Writing Collection Descriptions- OLD
  • Writing Collection Descriptions
  • Collection Description Examples
  • Templates
  • @museumex

MuseumMetadataExchange

Cultural and historical collections (and metadata)

You are here: Home / Archives for October 2010

Site Visit to Queensland Museum

October 24, 2010 by Lynne McNairn Leave a Comment
Knitted bag from the Macgregor Collection, Queensland Museum

Last Thursday 21 October, I visited the Queensland Museum. I met with Paul Avern, Collection Manager, Collection Systems; Cecelia Ryan, Manager, Collection Systems; Lisa Harvey, Head, Collection Services; Dr Geraldine Mate, Senior Curator, Workshop Rail Museum and Imelda Miller, Assistant Curator, Torres Strait Islands and Pacific Indigenous Studies.

Staff at Queensland Museum had already produced a possible list of collection groupings Collection Group List. They enjoyed the idea of creating new collection groupings and giving people different views or entry points into their collections. In fact Imelda observed that it was an opportunity to direct researchers down new pathways, away from the well trodden traditional collections made by white men in the nineteenth century!

Knitted bag and tapa cloth, both from the Macgregor Collection, Queensland Museum

Another discussion centred on the practicable aspects of creating collection groupings in the database and reflecting these groupings on the Website. As I’m sure is the case with all of us, having an idea of what would make a good collection grouping and being able to easily retrieve these records in the database are quite different things. All of us have cataloguing backlogs and thematic concepts are not often recorded in catalogues.

Over the past three years Queensland Museum has been undertaking a major stores rationalisation project and as part of this like objects have been housed together. Lisa Harvey who has been managing this project observed that searching by location could be an effective way to create useful collection grouping. These groups could then be saved in the database.

In the afternoon at Cecilia’s suggestion, we worked through writing a draft collection level description. The example chosen was the MacGregor Collection, a significant historical collection of over 4000 items from Papua New Guinea. It was agreed that as well as providing a high level description it would be useful to break this collection down into more manageable chunks. After some discussion it was felt that the database field of “collection type” could be used. Descriptions could then be provided for the MacGregor domestic objects, MacGregor fishing equipment etc. This approach should make this collection more appealing to a wider range of researchers as well as increasing it’s “findability” by providing more detail.

The development of a common object name thesaurus for Australian use was also of particular interest to the Queensland Museum and they are keen to participate in this aspect of the project.

It was great to meet with the staff at Queensland Museum and talk through some of practicable aspects of using their collection database (Vernon) to help with this project.

Image credits: Knitted bag and tapa cloth, both from the Macgregor Collection, Queensland Museum

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: collection level description, Defining collections, Queensland Museum, Site visits

Storing Collection Level Descriptions in Vernon CMS

October 21, 2010 by jcarbon Leave a Comment
2000/118/1 Drawer from Collector's Cabinet, Powerhouse Museum Collection

I’ve been chatting with Matt Crozier at Vernon Systems and Cecelia Ryan at Queensland Museum about where Collection Level Descriptions for the MME can be stored in Vernon CMS. The consensus seems to be that the easiest way to do this at the moment is to use an Authority file which can be linked to an Object record. An obvious one to use would be Collection or a User Defined Authority file. Any other Authority file would work the same way though.

Several Collection Description elements fit neatly into Authority file fields that are already available:

  • Name, Name (alternate), Name (brief) could be entered in the Name, Short Name, Long Name fields.
  • Description (brief) and Description (full or significance) could be entered in the Description and Scope Notes fields.
  • Related Collection could be entered into the Related Term field.

Collection Vernon

Collection Vernon

The Management Flag edit table could then be used to deal with all remaining Collection Description elements. A Management Flag for each of these could be created and then data would be entered in the Notes field.

Data for a multi-value element, like Place and Subject, could be entered in the one Notes field separated by a bar. For example, Place: Being, China | Peking, China | Hong Kong, Subject: British Empire | Chinese Culture | the Fifties

Collection Vernon

There are other ways this data could be entered using the Management Flag edit table, but I think this is a simple and straight forward way to approach it.

To make it easier to find and export your data, you could also group your Collection Descriptions together. They could be linked to a top term (eg, Museum Metadata Exchange) or alternatively you could use the Authority Status field or create a Management Flag.

There’s also some information about storing MME data in Vernon on the Vernon User Forum.

Image credit: 2000/118/1 Drawer from Collector’s Cabinet Powerhouse Museum Collection

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: Cecelia Ryan, collection level description, collection system, Julie-Anne Carbon, Matt Crozier, Queensland Museum, Vernon CMS

Site visits to ACMI and Museum Victoria

October 18, 2010 by jcarbon 2 Comments
Objects from Matchbox Collection Powerhouse Museum Collection

I took the opportunity to formally present the MME project to staff at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image (ACMI) and Museum Victoria (MV) while Lynne was in Melbourne last week.

On Thursday (14/10) we went to ACMI where we met with Michael Perry, Head of Media Technology (and MME Site coordinator) and Nick Richardson, Collections and Access Manager. The meeting went well and even though ACMI are in the midst of a collection re-valuation, they were enthusiastic about their involvement in the project and especially interested in the establishment of an Australian Object thesaurus.

On Friday (15/10) Lynne and I presented the MME to Museum Victoria staff and again the project was very well received. While the Museum already has many collection descriptions it can modify for inclusion in the MME, Curators were also keen to develop some new collection groupings and descriptions specifically tailored to a research and academic audience.

The issue of how all the data required for a Full Collection Description could be stored the Museum’s CMS, EMu, was also raised during the meeting. As many of the missing fields like a second description field and a URL for an online link, could be useful for other purposes, the possibility of modifying EMu in the future to accommodate this data was discussed. The potential involvement other EMu sites, contributing to the MME, in this conversation was also considered.

As with other sites we’ve visited, the Object thesaurus component of the project generated much interest and the ability to vote for terms was greeted with great enthusiasm by several people!

Since last week’s meeting at Museum Victoria, Ely Wallis, Manager, Online Collections, has organised fortnightly meetings for those involved in the MME, and Curators expect to have a initial list of 50 collections selected for the MME in about a fortnight.

Image Credit: Objects from Matchbox Collection Powerhouse Museum Collection

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: ACMI, collection level description, collection system, Julie-Anne Carbon, Museum Victoria, Site visits

Site visit to Australian National Maritime Museum

October 11, 2010 by Lynne McNairn Leave a Comment
Ship Model "Loch Vennachor" in bottle, 1977. Collection: Powerhouse Museum

Last Thursday (7th October)  Julie-Anne and myself made our first official site visit to the Australian National Maritime Museum at Darling Harbour in Sydney.  The ANMM are very organised and enthusiastic about the project.   Sally Fletcher, Georgia Cunningham (Registration) and Lindsey Shaw (Senior Curator) had made a pre-emptive visit to Ingrid and myself and had already started thinking about how they would  conceptionalise their collection groupings.  

Lindsey had left for a conference immediately after the initial meeting and came to our ‘official’ meeting list in hand.  She advised  “As I sat listening to a particularly long-winded conference paper in Baltimore, USA recently, my mind turned to home and things to do when I got back. The Museum Metadata Exchange rushed to the front of my mind and 15 minutes later I had the genesis of a list! Almost every day I can think of others to add. And then the fun begins!”  Here is Lindsey’s list.

In addition to Lindsey thinking about the groupings, The Registrars had been thinking about how to use their database to keep this information locally.  The ANMM plan to maximise the benefits of their participation in this project by maintaining the collection level descriptions in their own database and reflecting these objects grouping on their own Website.

Our presentation was given to a wider group of Curators and the IT Manager.  It was well received and the Maritime Museum is rearing to go!

Object Ship Model

Image Credits: Object Ship Model “Loch Vennachor” in bottle and glass negative Fort Denison” c. 1884-1917, Kerry and Co, Collection Powerhouse Museum

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: collection level description, Defining collections, National Maritime Museum, Site visits

Joining the MME

October 10, 2010 by Lynne McNairn Leave a Comment
Collection Flickr: madelinetosh CC by-nc-nd 2.0

I joined the Museum Metadata Exchange Project as a Data Analyst in September. I’m based in Sydney at the Powerhouse Museum and will be looking after the contributing institutions in Sydney, Canberra, Brisbane and possibly Darwin. I’ve recently been in Melbourne to meet up with my Southern based counterpart, Julie-Anne Carbon, at Museum Victoria. We conducted two site visits at the Australian Centre for the Moving Image and Museum Victoria. Both meetings went well with staff at both institutions keen to contribute and exited about the development of an Australian thesaurus.

We aim to list some of the controlled vocabularies and thesauri museums are using to describe their collections. So far we’ve learned that people are using (and/or interested in) the Schools Online Thesaurus, the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus and the Australian Pictorial Thesaurus.

Image Credit: Collection Flickr: madelinetosh CC by-nc-nd 2.0

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: Australian, data analyst, Lynne McNairn, Museum Metadata Exchange, Site visits, thesauri, thesaurus

Change of pace: Museums Australia conference 2010

October 4, 2010 by Ingrid Mason 1 Comment
Object oriented pattern 03 Flickr: yhancik CC by-nc-nd 2.0

The week at Museums Australia 2010 of formal talks and social networking opportunities has been deep and the action and interaction moved at an incredible pace. This is the second MA conference I have been to and in one year there seems to be a noticeable difference in the Australian museum community. The air of the conference was positive and energised and with all my technical interests put upfront, the digital initiatives and projects seemed more numerous – and the dialogue seemed more about the how and what-next rather than the why. The presentations I attended were enlightening, slick, tightly focused, well chaired and the clustering of topics was well managed. Museums Australia (Victoria) have done an incredible job and deserved all the applause and gratitude shown at the end of Friday. The reason I put “pace change” into the title of this post was I got the distinct sense that the Australian museum sector has shifted gears when it comes to using technology. There is always plenty of getting down to business in the museum world, but from last year to this, there seemed a noticeable confidence and capability with technology, aided I think by those already engaged in the social media world – to wit Museum3 and MANexus – and those interested in joining in. If it is an ancient Chinese curse to be told “may you live in interesting times” – it is an opportunity that the passion of museum practitioners never seem to fail to make the most of and here in Australia.

Motion gears - team force Flickr: ralphbijker CC by 2.0

The #ma2010conf Twitter stream had a slow start but by Friday it was crackling with activity as more and more museum people jumped on board and they’re tweeting away still. Some quick reflections on the conference from the sessions I attended:

The plenary session on Wednesday with Professor Richard Sandell from the University of Leicester was a wonderful kick-start to the conference. Richard talked about museums using a human rights framework as the lens through which to engage museum audiences. He highlighted the work done through the Gallery of Modern Art in Glasgow. It seems self-evident that there is a social role in museums, this framework though offers much food for thought, particularly in the UK where there is legislation to aid with addressing issues of equity in society. The Equality Act 2010 will require public funded organisations to address issues of equity through their work.

Professor Warren Bebbington’s (University of Melbourne) presentation raised the issue of support for university museums particularly within their own academic community – also known as Cinderella collections – see the report on Collections Australia Network. Amanda Burnitt and Dr Andrew Jamieson from the Ian Potter Museum of Art at University of Melbourne are doing incredible work with providing an environment to enable hands-on classes with students and supporting object based research. Their success seems to stand out as the exception that is sadly proving the rule with regard to the welfare of university museums and their incredible collections. It was encouraging to hear about the success of their work and to learn that the model that they are using comes from Harvard University Art Museums and that Amanda was actively working to engage the scholarly community there at Melbourne in that framework. In the same session that day I learned about the Museum Appreciation Society (MAS) set up at Macquarie University by some active and interested museum studies students. Using Facebook and the lure of cake they have really mobilised interest, specifically with international students keen to make the most of their time studying in Australia and of course socialising! I’ll be interested to see how MAS extends its reach to museum and material culture studies students across Australia. Seems the network has extended already up from Sydney to Newcastle and my suspicions is that is only going to grow using the simplicity of social networking to do the information transfer and enable people to connect. It is utterly wonderful to see enthusiasm, passion and pragmatism in action and watch technology operate so obviously as an enabler to a community of practice (and study and cake consumption).

I spoke in the Friday morning session – Keeping Up, or Leading from the Front? New Technologies – about this project and the role of museums (with cultural and historical collections) in object (and collection data) based research with a presentation called Tracing History and Contemporary Patternmaking. Then in the next session on the New Roles of Technology I chaired the audience had three challenges presented by David Demant, Liam Wyatt and Kate Chmiel to consider. David put digital preservation on the agenda and showed a short video of two of the volunteers working at Museum Victoria on transferring data from paper tape to floppy disc and onto USB to upload onto a network. Liam talked about his experience as the Wikipedian in residence at the British Museum. He talked about how positive the interaction was between the Wikipedian community and those from the British Museum working to put content about the museum’s collection online and showed some pretty convincing figures about the power of online exposure of this rich content and the knock on effect of driving traffic to the Museum’s. This pilot is a great example of how the volunteer workforce (Wikipedians) can help to put rich cultural content online working alongside museum practitioners. Liam also mentioned that the UK government has decreed that all public sector generated content developed for public consumption can now go out under Open Government licences with the help of a UK Government Licencing Framework for public sector information. This seems an obvious but also radical move in many regards – it took me some time to absorb the implications of that decision and then the questions started popping up. I began to think about what policy changes and operational mechanisms would need to be reworked to enable that to happen. I then asked myself what a decision like that would mean here in Australia and if the new government is likely to take the gov2.0 initiative in this direction. Food for thought most definitely for cultural institutions. Given the discussion in one of the workshopping sessions in #ADF2010 at ACMI on Tuesday had moved in the direction of asking museums to publish their collection data capture schemas (for academics to get a sense of how collection data is captured and used). The next step is one the Powerhouse has already taken, to put a subset of its collection data up online. The Powerhouse Museum is in the process of getting a description of that dataset put together so sense (or as David put it in his session on digital preservation, an important key like the Rosetta stone to unlock that which is encoded) the collection data.

Last but not least Kate Chmiel talked about the #collectionfishing weekly game happening online via the micro-blogging site Twitter. Kate talked about the pleasure taken, learning gained, interest shown and social networking enabled every week by a bunch of people enjoying working with collections but not getting much of a chance (or a reason) to duck into the collection store and take a look around. These diverse and playful GLAM practitioners from around Australia and New Zealand in organisations large and small, urban and regional, spend a few minutes fishing in their collections (and in others) looking for interesting collection items to show each other based around a theme. The rules are essentially there are no rules, except it seems two: that once a week someone who has an idea on a Monday sets a theme and anyone can join in. Kate talked about the range of topics and the intriguing, lateral approaches we all have to take sometimes to find collection items to draw to each others’ attention. She used the example of the “hats” theme which turned into a competition of whose hat is bigger game and the “hooks and loops” theme (there was a hung parliament at the time) that draw all manner of objects virtually out of the store: corsets, ropes, and meat hooks. What a great series of talks and that doesn’t mention the astounding PhD work of Dianne Fitzpatrick in her paper entitled “A Management Plan for Near Eastern Artefact Collections” looking at finding a methodology to help archaeologists to consider how to “manage” up to 4-5 tonnes of artefacts being dug up in incredible sites such as Tell Ahmar in Syria – and what framework for assessment (for long term retention) is appropriate. The magnitude of that conundrum made me very glad that Dianne was doing such incredibly useful research.

Image Credit: Object oriented pattern 03 Flickr: yhancik CC by-nc-nd 2.0 Motion gears – team force Flickr: ralphbijker
CC by 2.0

Filed Under: Updates Tagged With: #ma2010conf, collection data research, cultural analytics, manexus, material culture, museum3, Museums Australia, object analytics, object based research, social media

Recent Posts

  • Google Analytics for MME
  • What is the Museum Metadata Exchange?
  • Feedback from MME Steering Committee Meeting
  • Big thankyou to MME Site Co-ordinators & Contributors
  • MME Update & Next Steps

Recent Comments

  • Conceptualising collections… « Intelligent Heritage on In Museum Victoria
  • Conceptualising collections… « Intelligent Heritage on Access to Historical and Cultural Collections
  • ingridm on Site visits to ACMI and Museum Victoria
  • Kristy Dermody on Site visits to ACMI and Museum Victoria
  • ingridm on Change of pace: Museums Australia conference 2010

Archives

  • December 2012
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010

Categories

  • Uncategorized
  • Updates

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Secondary Sidebar Widget Area

This is the Secondary Sidebar Widget Area. You can add content to this area by visiting your Widgets Panel and adding new widgets to this area.

Return to top of page

Copyright © 2013 · Delicious Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in