too many docs!!
Feb 8, 2007 ditigital documents, research, tools
Most of my documents at the archives are available in microfilm, which, although nice for preserving the integrity of the 600-year old documents I look at, means that the only available copying method is a paper photocopy from the microfilm. It’s all very nice to have hard copies of things but for a big research project such as mine, it means I end up with thousands of paper sheets to bring home.
I pondered about it for a while. The lot was too heavy to bring with me as carry on when I go back to Canada. Sending it through the mail or as checked luggage means a risk I’m not prepared to take. The only way I could do it is if I had a second set of copies done. That way, I could send one set, wait until it got there and then send the second set without having to worry about it. There’s only one problem with that: it would double the amount of paper and weight of the whole lot.
The solution occurred to me when I had to scan a document for my dad. Since we don’t have a scanner at home here, I went to a local photocopying place in Gracia. I noticed that their photocopying machine was also a scanner so theoretically, it would be just as easy for them to scan something as it would to photocopy it. So I talked to Susana, the girl in charge, and we agreed on a price per volume to scan my documents. I took about half of what I have sitting at home last week and went to pick it up yesterday. Total: 2,771 pages. About 1.5 GB stored on a DVD. And that’s only half of what I have photocopied at home! And I have probably as many pages from the digital registers*! I estimate that by the end, I’ll probably have somewhere in the vicinity of 10,000 manuscript pages, covering a short period of 10 years.
I’ll definitely need to find a way of narrowing it down when I get back….
——-
* some of the chancery registers I look at have been digitized (photographed) and I was able to just copy the image files instead of making photocopies of those…
February 8th, 2007 at 9:50 pm
Hey Alex,
That sounds like a pretty ingenious solution. I prefer having digital images of manuscript images anyway because then you can zoom in for more detail with difficult sections. It’s too bad the microfilm reader doesn’t double as a scanner like they have at PIMS.
Could you not use filemaker as well, to organize your images?
Great new site!
Cheers,
Christian
February 8th, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Hey Christian!
I was hoping you’d come by
I too prefer to have digital images. It’s just more convenient to be able to access the documentation anywhere – it’s much easier carrying around 10,000 pages in a computer
Plus, Alan is planning to buy a Mac Pro with a big 23″ display, so working on the images there should be fun!
As for Filemaker, that might be a good idea… I haven’t thought of it beyond having a link to the actual folios from the entry in the database. Are you thinking of something more elaborate?
February 9th, 2007 at 1:00 am
Well, I suspect you will end up using this material for years to come. Not just for your thesis work, but projects down the road. Once you start reading through it, organizing your thoughts, I’m sure you’ll be able to narrow everything down more easily.
Ingenious idea though! Bobby actually digitized the entire Furs de Valencia for me before we left Toronto. It is great having the whole legal code on one disk. I wish that the ARV would let me digitize. Maybe now with the renovated building and services?
February 9th, 2007 at 1:21 am
I think Filemaker has the ability to store images in container fields. Then you could add other fields for description, transcription, archive #, folio #,..etc.. Try creating a field and copying the image right in. It should work.
The whole thing would then be searchable. I was thinking of setting something similar up when I start my research, but since I’m drowning in my major field readings, French and German, it remains a dream.
I’m very jealous about the Mac Pro. My stupid PC notebook has turned out to be no end of trouble. Next time, it will be Mac all the way.
February 9th, 2007 at 7:41 am
Dana – I wouldn’t count on being able to digitize things at the ARV. Unless they have stuff already digitized (lots of things are showing up at that project to have archival stuff available online). That’s because the archives that belong to the federal government are sort of stuck in an age before the existence of digital cameras. All the provincial/municipal archives seem to have absolutely NO problem with you bringing your camera in and taking pictures but the ACA forbids because of orders from Madrid… But maybe the ARV is a little different since they seem to be run by the generalitat??
February 9th, 2007 at 7:48 am
Christian – I thought of just using metadata on adobe bridge to add keywords that I could search… but otherwise, I would just enter the info I needed from each doc in my database and search that… I’m afraid that having a big page-size image right in it might make things slow & visually awkward? Besides… many docs have more than one page… That’s why I thought of links; particularly since most of the time, if I have my notes done properly I won’t have always to be referring to the original. Anyways, just thoughts at this point… we can test different options when I get back.
I’m sorry to hear about your PC notebook. I don’t want to sound like those fanatical mac ppl but I have to confess I don’t see myself ever going back. Besides, just having all the nifty little research apps that I found available only for mac, is well worth the investment. I don’t know what I would do without bookends & macjournal at this point. Can’t wait for the new version of OS X to come out!
February 9th, 2007 at 5:18 pm
They don’t let you bring your own camera, so I suspect I’m stuck with microfilm. One good thing is that UTEP has a digital microfilm reader! Huge difference over the older ones as you can zoom in really closely on a particular word to figure it out. I love them, which is good, given how much time I’m likely to spend in front of them…
February 10th, 2007 at 12:47 am
hmmm. that sounds good
I’ll probably have to get my own microfilm reader one day…