Weinheimer Jim wrote:
>
>> On
>> the other hand, libraries, especially libraries with larger
>> collections can not afford to catalog (describe) all of their
>> materials in great detail. It is too expensive.
>
> This is a sentiment that I have seen written over and over, but I haven't seen any evidence to support it: cataloging is "too expensive." In my experience, cataloging is not among the most highly paid of professions, and when you take the cost of original cataloging of an item (say, an average of 1/2 hour work--say $30-$50, but in many cases less), and compare it to what the amount the author cost to actually research and write the book (plus additional expenses), the cost of editing, layout, printing (when it is done), plus all the secretaries and others who help, I don't think that is such an expensive price. If cataloging systems were improved through importing records in other formats, there could be a tremendous time and cost saving.
>
There are figures. The Library of Congress estimates about $150 per
book. That's original cataloging, of course. Serials Solutions provides
a "cost calculator" but it looks to be aimed at copy cataloging:
http://www.serialssolutions.com/ss_360_marc_updates_calculator.html
There are numerous studies (just google "cost of cataloging"). The big
ticket items, logically, are
- cataloging for less common languages
- cataloging special materials (rare books, archives, oddball stuff)
- cataloging non-book materials
Academic libraries put more money into cataloging than public libraries,
partly because they do more original cataloging, partly because they do
more detailed cataloging, and partly because they have a wider range of
types of materials and languages to deal with.
There are a lot of services that will provide cataloging for you, but I
couldn't find any that included their cost figures on their web sites.
Maybe some folks here who have used such services can weigh in on that.
I know that a lot of libraries today outsource a certain amount of their
cataloging, either getting it from the book vendors or from a cataloging
service. I have also heard people complain bitterly about the quality of
those records. (They also complain about the quality of LoC records.)
Also, one of the things that came up at the most recent LoC meeting on
the future of bibliographic control is that there is a *lifetime* cost
for each record created. So there are all the changes to records that
take place over time, plus all of the administrative actions that result
in database changes (binding, moving to storage, etc.). That meeting,
which was entirely about this topic, is available for viewing:
http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/meetings/
>
> But the real price continues to drop when you add onto this the possibilities for sharing records, this $30-$50 is shared among all the institutions who can use that record. So, if the Library of Congress catalogs a book and I take the record, it costs me zero. They can take a record of mine (thereby cutting in half our costs), and so on.
>
I have been surprised at the number of libraries that cannot afford to
be part of record sharing. I don't have a measure of it, but anecdotally
it's higher than I expected. There are many libraries that are not part
of OCLC, for example, because they cannot afford to be. One of the
things that we don't know about sharing is who pays what costs. There is
some indication that some libraries (like LoC and certain large academic
libraries) are shouldering a large proportion of the cost than other
libraries. Which is fine except that (in the U.S.) there is no library
that is funded to provide cataloging for other libraries. I think this
will be investigated in the future as part of LoC's looking into their
own cataloging activities and costs.
> Today, the possibility fo
> r cooperation in "metadata creation" are greater than ever. Publishers create metadata, international organizations, educational institutions and many others. Libraries and especially catalog divisions need to open their eyes to the new vistas of cooperation. In view of these considerations, I honestly do not think it is a matter of cost. It is a matter of people changing some work practices, and really cooperating. I've written quite a bit on this in AUTOCAT.
>
Well, you seem to be in a minority. I would advise looking at the
day-long meeting about this topic that I posted above. Plus cost came up
at the other two FoBC meetings (although the webcast of the first one
isn't available). There seem to be a lot of folks for whom the costs of
cataloging are a big concern.
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
Received on Fri Aug 24 2007 - 10:33:48 EDT