walsby wrote: > To produce a photocopy incurs the cost of machine wear, paper, and personnel cost (my > experience of Somerset record office is that the staff do take more care to give you > a good copy than some other record offices). So you pay for goods and services. Which is normal. > There is no cost to the archive service for a researcher to use a camera. I think that is the crux of the matter. The Record Office is actually losing revenue, albeit a very small amount. Photocopies cost 40p per page. A daily camera use permit is £2.00. If people are using a camera then the chances are they are going to make more than 5 shots. After that they are in pocket. There will still be people who will want photocopies. I know when I've been at the Record Office, there's invariably been three or four people there using cameras, myself included, even though I'm transcribing documents. That said, I also get photocopies. The last batch I had done (which cost me over £100) included some bound indentures which couldn't be completely copied. That means my husband is going to have to come to the record office with me to take images of the missing parts. There'll be more than £2s worth of images needed. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to sort the documents out before the change comes in. > "Falling > in line with other offices that already charge" is the same excuse that motroists > offer when caught speeding - everyone else does it, so why shouldn't I ? It's no > excuse at all. I don't think that's a valid comparison. There's an inherent risk that someone will be killed by a speeding driver. There's no such danger from a camera permit :)) "Falling in line" is a reason not an excuse and I think it will become common across all Record Offices that currently allow the use of cameras. The alternative is a blanket ban on cameras. One of the archivists at SRO did tell me there are concerns about the possible damage photocopying does to documents. So it may well be that all photocopying of documents will stop. Where are the choices then? Transcription or camera. That means there will be a drop in revenue which has to be made up somehow. No doubt the Record Office believes that £2pd/£8pw/£50pa is adequate given the savings on paper and electricity they'll make, esp with the cost of electricity set to rise significantly during the remainder of the year. I think, overall, researchers will be better off. It's not as if the photocopying of documents has been totally withdrawn (yet). -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Hi . I agree , the Somerset Record Office copies are great . Their service is great also . Laurie ----- Original Message ----- From: Charani To: eng-somerset@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:56 PM Subject: Re: [ENG-SOM] Som. Rec. Office to charge for use of cameras walsby wrote: > To produce a photocopy incurs the cost of machine wear, paper, and personnel cost (my > experience of Somerset record office is that the staff do take more care to give you > a good copy than some other record offices). So you pay for goods and services. Which is normal. > There is no cost to the archive service for a researcher to use a camera. I think that is the crux of the matter. The Record Office is actually losing revenue, albeit a very small amount. Photocopies cost 40p per page. A daily camera use permit is £2.00. If people are using a camera then the chances are they are going to make more than 5 shots. After that they are in pocket. There will still be people who will want photocopies. I know when I've been at the Record Office, there's invariably been three or four people there using cameras, myself included, even though I'm transcribing documents. That said, I also get photocopies. The last batch I had done (which cost me over £100) included some bound indentures which couldn't be completely copied. That means my husband is going to have to come to the record office with me to take images of the missing parts. There'll be more than £2s worth of images needed. Unfortunately, I'm not going to be able to sort the documents out before the change comes in. > "Falling > in line with other offices that already charge" is the same excuse that motroists > offer when caught speeding - everyone else does it, so why shouldn't I ? It's no > excuse at all. I don't think that's a valid comparison. There's an inherent risk that someone will be killed by a speeding driver. There's no such danger from a camera permit :)) "Falling in line" is a reason not an excuse and I think it will become common across all Record Offices that currently allow the use of cameras. The alternative is a blanket ban on cameras. One of the archivists at SRO did tell me there are concerns about the possible damage photocopying does to documents. So it may well be that all photocopying of documents will stop. Where are the choices then? Transcription or camera. That means there will be a drop in revenue which has to be made up somehow. No doubt the Record Office believes that £2pd/£8pw/£50pa is adequate given the savings on paper and electricity they'll make, esp with the cost of electricity set to rise significantly during the remainder of the year. I think, overall, researchers will be better off. It's not as if the photocopying of documents has been totally withdrawn (yet). -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to ENG-SOMERSET-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1524 - Release Date: 28/06/2008 7:42 PM