VIDEOLIB Archive: Re: Previewing question

------=_NextPart_000_0081_01BFA3D4.E2260540
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We, too, preview everything that we are permitted to, one way or another =
- purchase on approval, etc. The only reasons I will not pursue =
previewing a program are 1) it's a "feature film" ; 2) the program is =
very inexpensive, distributed by a small company that absolutely will =
not consider any return of its material and the professor just "cannot" =
do without it; 3) the professor has seen it somewhere else and knows =
what it is. If we keep a preview copy, we do not have our staff check it =
again for technical quality - the previewing professor will let us know =
if anything is wrong with it (it's happened before). Programs purchased =
without being previewed are viewed by the staff for technical quality =
and gathering cataloging data. Viewing programs for quality takes up =
60-70% of one staff member's time in addition to the 8-12 student =
workers who also view purchased programs as circulation traffic permits. =
We probably return 3-5 programs per year, out of 250-300 purchased. =
Although I do not purchase audio books every year, we do check each tape =
in each title purchased and have returned a few of those as well. =
Student workers can more easily check these than video programs at the =
circulation desk. We also check CDs and CD-ROMs (software =
compatibility, technical quality, etc.). Because we also have such a =
long time between acquisition and cataloging, this process is a must. =
Distributors would be reluctant to provide free replacement for =
something we have had for a year or more that we finally notified them =
was defective. When possible, we get the programs checked before we pay =
for them. Our collection is paged, and only full-time staff or graduate =
assistants charge materials that leave the facility, so we do not use =
any type of security strip.

As for taking in someone else's purchases - on this campus, I would tell =
the donating department that keeping such programs as the "100 Best" in =
our collection does not comply with our mission or acquisition policies =
and that the programs would be better stored within their department. I =
have the flexibility to do this because most departments house their own =
collections, and we are not required to house all the AV materials on =
campus.

Hope this helps,
Gail B. Fedak
Instructional Media Resources
Middle Tennessee State University
Murfreesboro, TN 37132
phone 615-898-2740
fax 615-898-2530
email gfedak@mtsu.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: margit j. smith <mjps@acusd.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <videolib@library.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 10:07 AM
Subject: Previewing question

>Hello, Videolib members
>
>I am brand-new to this list, and have several questions already.=20
>=20
>How much time do you spend, on average, in previewing videos etc. =
before
>cataloging them? What seems to be the rate with which you have to =
return
>material because of faults in production? Who does the previewing? What
>about cassettes?=20
>
>Is there a security strip, tattle tape or similar product, for videos,
>and if so, where is it applied?
>
>I will appreciate any information you care to share. Thanks.
>
>Margit
>--=20
>Margit J. Smith, Asst. Prof.
>Head of Technical Services
>Copley Library
>University of San Diego
>5998 Alcala Park
>San Diego, CA 92110-2492
>619/260-2365
>

------=_NextPart_000_0081_01BFA3D4.E2260540
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

We, too, preview everything that we = are=20 permitted to, one way or another - purchase on approval, etc. The only = reasons I=20 will not pursue previewing a program are 1) it's a "feature = film" ; 2)=20 the program is very inexpensive, distributed by a small company that = absolutely=20 will not consider any return of its material and the professor just=20 "cannot" do without it; 3) the professor has seen it somewhere = else=20 and knows what it is. If we keep a preview copy, we do not have our = staff check=20 it again for technical quality - the previewing professor will let us = know if=20 anything is wrong with it (it's happened before). Programs purchased = without=20 being previewed are viewed by the staff for technical quality and = gathering=20 cataloging data. Viewing programs for quality takes up 60-70% of one = staff=20 member's time in addition to the 8-12 student workers who also view = purchased=20 programs as circulation traffic permits. We probably return 3-5 programs = per=20 year, out of 250-300 purchased. Although I do not purchase audio books = every=20 year, we do check each tape in each title purchased and have returned a = few of=20 those as well. Student workers can more easily check these than video = programs=20 at the circulation desk. We also check CDs and CD-ROMs (software=20 compatibility, technical quality, etc.). Because we also have such a = long time=20 between acquisition and cataloging, this process is a must. Distributors = would=20 be reluctant to provide free replacement for something we have had for a = year or=20 more that we finally notified them was defective. When possible, we get = the=20 programs checked before we pay for them. Our collection is paged, and = only=20 full-time staff or graduate assistants charge materials that leave the = facility,=20 so we do not use any type of security strip.

As for taking in someone else's purchases - on this = campus, I=20 would tell the donating department that keeping such programs as the = "100=20 Best" in our collection does not comply with our mission or = acquisition=20 policies and that the programs would be better stored within their = department. I=20 have the flexibility to do this because most departments house their own = collections, and we are not required to house all the AV materials on=20 campus.