![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 373
|
![]() Quote:
Absolutely right. You could not do this with a group of collectors, and I wouldn't suggest such a thing. Successful classification schemes have formal bodies that govern them. What I am suggesting is that there is no reason collectors cannot adopt a scheme of their own, for their own collection. Those are really basic metadata elements. I have no doubt it could be improved upon. Regards, Harry |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() Quote:
I also think nmany collectors already practice such habit. I keep a record of all items, split by (1) firearms, (2) white arms and (3) diverse. Organized by: - Item number ... although i don't stick a label to the pieces, which is an option. - Type ... sword, pistol, etc. - Origin ... Country, area. - Model ... basket hilt, box lock, etc. - Serial number ... when existing. - Marks/inscriptions. - Seller/trader. - Age. - Description details ... full as possible, incl. dimensions, weight, etc - Price acquired. - Date acquired. - Hiperlink to photos ... of my own archives. When i update my little collection to the Insurance company, i copy all the above, except the Seller/trader column. No need to transmit such info. Basicaly when you buy a piece, very often some of the particulars to be recorded are not available; then you have to browse the net, consult the forum and all that ... like you would give your kingdom to reach the info to fill all those columns. But that's what makes all the fun. - Last edited by fernando; 17th September 2015 at 12:51 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|