In article <1992Jan15.010840.13772 at Princeton.EDU>,
unasmith at phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Una Smith) writes:
> As a biologist, I own a growing collection of slides. For most, I want
> to record a date (year and month, at least), location, and the names of
> any people and/or scientific and/or common names of any plants and
> animals appearing in the picture. If I were to build an old-fashioned
> card catalog for my collection, there would be many "access points" per
> slide. Clearly, I need a computer program to handle creation,
> maintenance/updating/corrections, and elaborate searches on keywords,
> geographic names, etc.
>> Any suggestions? I've been told some bibliographic software packages
> have some options for image cataloging, but they sound pretty
> rudimentary. I know no photographers who bother to do any cataloging at
> all. I realize that all cataloging systems involve a lot of work, which
> may never pay off because most slides will never be used more than 6
> months after they're taken...so, is it even worth bothering with?
>> - Una
For cataloging, if you don't really need an image in the computer memory (this
would take up a huge amount of disk space anyway), then a good database such
as Paradox or dBase should be suitable. You could define your own fields as
you require them. However, it would take a long time to input the information
you already have, which is the major drawback. But these programs would be
cheaper than Inmagic.
Alan
