Hi Jeri,

 

This is a question we revisit each time we enter into TMS a work that has multiple parts.  As a rule, we enter pieces as components if they’re part of a work/installation and will never be shown separately.  Likewise, we enter in equipment as components of an installation only if it’s specific to that piece (i.e. not a DVD player that is a part of our general AV inventory).  It’s great because you don’t have to make a lot of object records, but you can record a component’s location and can split them out for various checklists, crate or shipping lists if necessary.  We use group objects and number pieces A, B, C, etc. when one of the parts could potentially be displayed on its own. 

 

That being said, and I guess this doesn’t stick to our rule, we recently accessioned a large installation comprising 100 drawings and I numbered them with A, B, C. etc.  Even though it’s one installation and the individual drawings won’t ever be shown separately, this way we were able to attach images to each object record rather than attaching 100 images to just one record. 

 

I hope this helps!

 

Thanks,

Julie

Julie Dickover
Associate Registrar
Hammer Museum

10899
Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90024

t 310-443-7082 / f 310-443-7079


From: The Museum System (TMS) Users [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeri Moxley
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 1:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Component vs. Group Object

 

 

Dear TMS List,

Please discuss the pros and cons of components vs. group objects for multi-part artworks (e.g., an installation piece that is comprised of 6 artworks).

Jeri

 

Jeri L. Moxley
Manager of Collection and Exhibition Information
Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

o: (212) 423-3509
c: (646) 912-3365
[log in to unmask]