APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2004-12 > 1101917830


From: "Elissa Scalise Powell, CGRS" <>
Subject: RE: [APG] Original vs Derivative, etc.
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 11:17:10 -0500
In-Reply-To: <df.7c5f24d.2edf3eb5@cs.com>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> The original does not have to be made at the time of the
> event. I could for instance create an original painting of San Francisco's
> 1906 earthquake and fire, without having been there. Anyone copying my
> original
> painting (if I were so skilled as to create one!) would be creating a
> derivative.

Thank you Christine for this clear explanation. I think I was confusing
original source with primary information. Sorry about that. Yes, an original
is the original. If it is a diary, then it is an original source but may
contain primary and secondary information depending on how close the writer
was to the subject. An abstract, transcript or even photocopy of the diary
is a derivative source which may (or may not) introduce errors not in the
original, but has to be evaluated differently than if the original was in
hand instead of the derivative.

Thanks for clarifying. Yes, a fascinating subject near and dear to all of
us. (Anyone else would think we are nuts! <G>)

-- Elissa Powell in Pittsburgh



This thread: