[table of contents | journal index]
Some Thoughts On Accessing Film Collections
Sabine Lenk, Cinémathèque Royale de Belgique
About a year ago - more exactly during the annual congress held in Los Angeles
(April 1995) - the Commission for Programming and Access to Collections
presented a so-called Work in Progress focusing on the questions
surrounding access to collections. This work treats the questions and problems
which arise in any working archive. Some Thoughts on Accessing Film Collections
was distributed to all official FIAF members and provisional members
as well.
Through the distribution of this work, the Commission expected - hoped,
even - to receive some comments or suggestions. To date, these have remained
very rare indeed. As a matter of fact, no more than two letters, sent by
Wolfgang Klaue (Germany) and Meg Labrum (Australia), reached the Commission.
After thoroughly examining the Commission's proposals, these two archivists
responded by submitting their own observations and suggestions. In accordance
with the basic structure of ideas exposed by the two authors, the Commission
would like at present to renew its demand for obtaining useful remarks from
FIAF's affiliates, thereby hoping to further enrich the text of Some
Thoughts on Accessing Film Collections.
According to Wolfgang Klaue, the main interest of this publication would
be to provide a summary of the methods or instruments available for replying
to any questions raised concerning access to collections. Being himself
a regular user of archive services, his letter is written first and foremost
(and explicitly) from the view-point of the visitor, as opposed to the archivist.
As a consequence, he had hoped for Some Thoughts...to take into account
the needs of the user. He thus proposes not to restrict the forthcoming
"manual" to the point of view of the archivist (as it is presented
now), but to broaden this view to include suggestions as to how a more fluid
"exploitation" of an archive's collection by the public could
be achieved.
In this context, the author wonders whether it would be necessary to make
a distinction between passive access (where the archive reacts to visitors'
demands) and active access (where the archive itself brings its material
out into the open, through programming for example). The last subject is
not treated in the present publication, but will form the object of a future
study by the Commission. Wolfgang Klaue in his letter effectively expresses
his concern that this distinction could entail the development of two different
conceptions concerning access to collections.
His reflexions being the fruit of almost daily visits to archives, Klaue
naturally raises some questions surrounding the diverse restrictions on
access: is it justified to provide access only to certain groups of visitors?
Under which conditions is a print considered to be preserved and, consequently,
to be accessible? Where does the priority lie: in giving access to all films
or in providing limited access only to the national collection or to a well-defined
segment of the collection (animated films, for example)? Which minimal technical
standards are required to guarantee a correct access procedure? What relationship
should there be between the number of preserved copies and of staff required
to guarantee access to the material?
Klaue goes on to examine the theme of "keeping the collection a secret",
and finds himself wondering in what respects an archive should remain silent
where its resources are concerned. According to him, most of today's archives
could easily make the extent of their collections a matter of public knowledge,
given the fact that legal rights would only be jeopardised in a small minority
of cases. These specific cases would, however, have to be approached with
the utmost care and precaution.
Another question raised by Wolfgang Klaue is that surrounding administrative
fees. What goal should they serve: the financing of access itself, or the
financing of the archive, or should they be considered as the user's contribution
to restoration or conservation costs? And what price can be charged to whom?
In his eyes, the fee charged by archives should be presented in the manual
as a justified demand, in accordance with the recommendations specified
by UNESCO in 1980.
The proposition stated in Some Thoughts... concerning access to any
given archive's file system - access limited according to certain specific
criteria - is heavily questioned by Wolfgang Klaue. Any shortcomings apparent
in a cataloguing system (complexity of the filing system, arbitrary data
selected only in accordance with the needs of the personnel, etc.) should
not lead to a situation where the user is denied access to the catalogue.
He thus suggests the correction of these faults and the compilation of user-friendly,
easily consultable information systems.
Wolfgang Klaue went to great lengths in examining the text in detail. He
repeatedly questions the validity of the practices in use at the present
time, as well as certain remarks which Some Thoughts... presents
to its readers. Moreover, he proposes an alternative formulation for many
passages which to his mind could lead to confusion.
Meg Labrum's commentaries mainly stem from her experience as "Senior
Manager of the Access Branch" at the National Film and Sound Archive
(Australia). She went on to compare the practices described in Some Thoughts...
with those in use in Melbourne. Just like Wolfgang Klaue, Meg Labrum discusses
the concepts of passive and active access to films. These relate, as she
states in her letter, primarily to the programming and presentation of films.
Production and broadcasting on television (which are practiced by the NFSA)
are considered by her to belong to a third category not represented by these
fields, although they could be employed to direct elements pertaining to
the domain of passive access towards that of active access (as an example,
Meg Labrum cites the distribution by an archive of a film on videotape or
the production of videotapes with a regional character). She also remarks
that access through such means as lending is not even mentioned, despite
the fact that this constitutes a valid intermediary between passive and
active access.
The archivist made a detailed analysis of some of the problems and practices
evoked in Some Thoughts... The principal aim of her archive being
to make its collection available to the public, the NFSA established a system
of "access centres" all over the country. The two principal offices
are to be found in the metropolitan areas of Sydney and Melbourne, while
regional "access centres" are accomodated in public libraries.
For the time being, the access there is still limited to prints and videotapes,
but it should be extended in the near future to include other types of information
(scenarios, etc.) in digitalized format.
According to Meg Labrum, the protection of material pertaining to the collection
is a must for all archives, but at the same time one of the most difficult
tasks. To this end, her archive developed a system where the collection
is managed by computer. The database is also structured according to differing
levels of access (it is multilayered), the accessibility of information
being regulated according to the specific needs of the personnel. Meg Labrum
would be interested in sharing the experience of other archives in this
field. Moreover, the NFSA is logged in to the Internet network and developed
a CD-ROM, enabling the user to discover the collection independently.
back to table of contents
Unfortunately, the NFSA is not capable of responding to all demands. Nevertheless,
thanks to a fee charged to the user, the archive was able to develop its
resources in matters of personnel.
The NFSA today asks its visitors to comply with interior regulations and
to guarantee this compliance through a signature before access is granted.
This act in the first place obliges them to assume the costs of the research,
even if it is not eventually completed by them. The archive also charges
a supplementary fee by the hour if the research should transcend a specified
time limit accorded free of charge.
Similarly, the part played by the archive should be clearly mentioned in
the (scientific) work delivered by the user who solicited its services.
This rule is sometimes unfortunately neglected, hence Meg Labrum's curiosity
as to how others handle this problem.
The Australian archivist also mentions access through means of reproduction.
This practice constitutes an important source of revenue for her institution.
Concerning films pertaining to the public domain, the archive charges "preservation
costs" justified by the efforts necessary to ensure proper conservation
and preservation of the material.
As a whole, Meg Labrum regards Some Thoughts... as a work which is
long overdue, and which finally opens possibilities for a discussion within
FIAF circles on the different topics surrounding access.
The Commission for Programming and Access to Collections wishes to thank
Meg Labrum and Wolfgang Klaue for their critical remarks and helpful suggestions.
The second edition of our Work in Progress will not fail to take
into account their valued comments.
Il y a un an environ - plus exactement, au moment du congrès
annuel de la FIAF à Los Angeles (avril 1995) - la Commission de
programmation et d'accès aux collections a présenté
un Work in Progress consacré à la question de l'accès
aux collections. Cet ouvrage aborde les questions et problématiques
suscitées par le fonctionnement d'une archive. Some Thoughts
On Accessing Film Collections a été distribué aux
membres officiels de la FIAF ainsi qu'aux membres provisoires.
En diffusant cet ouvrage, la Commission s'attendait, voire même espérait
recevoir des commentaires. Jusqu'à présent, les réactions
ont été rares. Seules deux longues lettres très suggestives
de Wolfgang Klaue (Allemagne) et de Meg Labrum (Australie) lui ont été
adressées. En examinant soigneusement les propos de la Commission,
les deux archivistes lui ont soumis leurs observations et suggestions.
Selon Wolfgang Klaue, l'intérêt de cette publication, est de
proposer un relevé des méthodes et instruments utilisés
pour répondre aux questions qui se posent au sujet de l'accès
à la collection. Etant aujourd'hui devenu un utilisateur régulier
des archives, sa lettre témoigne davantage (et explicitement) du
point de vue du visiteur que de celui de l'archiviste. Il aurait, par conséquent,
souhaité que Some Thoughts...tiennent aussi compte des besoins
de l'utilisateur. Il propose donc de ne pas se limiter à la vision
de l'archive (telle qu'elle est présentée dans l'ouvrage),
mais de l'élargir par quelques recommandations aux archives afin
d'arriver à une meilleure 'exploitation' de leur collection par le
public.
Wolfgang Klaue s'est donné la peine d'examiner le texte en détail.
D'une manière générale, il interroge à plusieurs
reprises l'utilité des pratiques usuelles à notre époque
et remet en question certaines réflexions présentées
au lecteur par Some Thoughts... Par ailleurs, il propose des formules
alternatives aux passages qui pourraient prêter à confusion.
Les commentaires de Meg Labrum s'inspirent de ses expériences de
'Senior Manager of the Acces Branch' à la National Film and Sound
Archive (Australie). Elle a comparé les pratiques décrites
dans Some Thoughts... avec celles en usage à Melbourne. Meg Labrum
s'interroge, tout comme Wolfgang Klaue, sur les concepts d'accès
passif et actif aux films. Ceux-ci concernent, dit-elle dans sa lettre,
la programmation et la présentation des films. Mais, selon elle,
ces deux concepts ne recouvrent pas la production et la diffusion télévisuelles
(deux activités du NFSA). Elle y voit une alternative qui consisterait
à utiliser les ressources de l'accès passif pour les orienter
vers un accès actif. (Meg Labrum cite en exemple la diffusion par
l'archive d'un film sur cassette vidéo ou la production de bandes
vidéo à caractère régional). Elle fait également
remarquer que l'accès par le biais du prêt n'est pas mentionné
bien qu'il se situe entre l'accès passif et l'accès actif.
Par ailleurs, l'archiviste répond plus en détail à
quelques-unes des problématiques et pratiques évoquées
par Some Thoughts...
En somme, Meg Labrum considère Some Thoughts... comme un ouvrage
"long overdue" et une chance de discuter, au sein de la FIAF,
les différents aspects de l'accès.
La Commission de programmation et d'accés remercie Meg Labrum
et Wolfgang Klaue pour leurs remarques critiques et leurs suggestions enrichissantes.
Une deuxième édition du Work in Progress ne manquera certainement
pas de prendre en compte leurs précieux commentaires.