DADE wrote:One of a large amount of microfiche that to digitize would cost a large amount of money. But using a camera in a cell phone from a microfiche screen gives a reasonable picture for free. The information was not in a good condition at the beginning when it went on to microfiche reels.
Coincidentally, I just had an email conversation with someone at a non-aviation archive about microfilm. He had written a very interesting
post covering the idiosyncrasies of the medium. I provided a link to a
comparable article from AirCorps Library on the subject as well as a pair of articles (
1,
2) showing "before and after" comparisons of effect of wear on microfilm.
To follow up on the archival definitions mentioned in a
previous post, I came across some references that made me realize it was missing entries for some graphic documents:
Archival/Library Object Type Definitions (Cont.)- Artwork - a graphic document created for an aesthetic purpose. Often reproduced in limited numbers as "prints". Contrast with technical drawing, which is scientific.
- Plan view - a graphic document depicting an aircraft from the front, side, and/or top or bottom. Typically used for aircraft recognition, sometimes in poster format. Can be broken down into two different sets of categories based on number of views (one, two, or three) and style (silhouette and line drawing). A one-view drawing of the side is referred to as a profile. Could be considered a subset of technical drawing.
- Technical drawing - a graphic document depicting an aircraft for use in design, construction, maintenance, repair, and/or overhaul. Can be broken down into two different sets of categories based on projection (perspective, isometric, oblique, and exploded) and purpose (detail, assembly, installation, and sectional).[1] Contrast with artwork, which is artistic. Non-preferred term: blueprint.
- Some good explanatory comparisons (1, 2) are available on Wikimedia Commons.
DADE wrote:Our museum library is not as sophisticated as others.
I know that everyone isn't able to use these exact definitions, but even if you can't they can still be helpful to think about the way collections are organized. The formerly book-bound Nomenclature for Museum Cataloging is now available online for free at
Nomenclature.info and it can also be useful for that purpose. Also, trust me, our collection is nowhere near as organized as this list may seem to suggest.

DADE wrote:We try to keep it simple as it can confuse the over 70s volunteers, especially myself.
Since you brought it up, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has an
excellent media format identification guide. It's actually quite useful because even though the cliché is that kids are supposed to be good with technology - the reality is that this only refers to
modern technology. Personally, between having my dad explain how he used to have to use an offset lithograph press make pamphlets and touring my
local printing museum, I realized how much I didn't know about the way things used to be done. So, it's not only old guys that can get confused!
Finally, I recently came across two additional aviation museum libraries/archives:
Libraries (Institution - Name of Collection - Size) (Cont.)- South Australian Aviation Museum - Library - 3,500 books, 120,000 photographs, 1,000 technical handbooks, 63 periodicals, 700 videos
Archives (Institution - Name of Collection - Size) (Cont.)EDIT (22-11-28): Add "sectional" as purpose of technical drawing in object type definitions list.
EDIT (22-12-02): The Drawing Change Manual of the Columbus Division of North American Aviation has a set of standards for drawing aircraft plan views on
page 6 that are particularly interesting in light of the attempt to define them above. In particular, it establishes conventions for point of view - such as profiles always have the nose facing left and overhead views always have the nose pointing down.
EDIT (23-01-23): Similar to the above, the Aeronautical Drafting Manual of the Society of Automotive Engineers also has directions on the "arrangement of views" on
page A1.04. For example, it also states that profile drawings should face left. I ran into a similar question of conventions when working on the
aircraft 3-views project as to what order the drawings should go in from top to bottom when drawn vertically. (e.g. top down, head on, profile)
EDIT (23-04-10): I came across a
thread on WW2Aircraft.net today that had links to a number of aircraft manufacturer production drawing "manuals of style".
Last edited by
Noha307 on Mon Apr 10, 2023 3:58 pm, edited 5 times in total.