HABS 2 - have the standards been updated?

[Ed Richards]

Had a request about doing a HABS 2 job. We talked about the standards for HABS a few years back, and I am wondering if they have been updated, i.e., is it still LF negatives and silver prints?

[Kirk Gittings]

You should check on the site. I believe LF negs are still required but not silver prints. What they are really archiving is the neg. The print is just reference to the neg.

see new guidelines

[Ed Richards]

Thanks Kirk! I found additional info that shows some examples of how you label the negatives and list them:

http://www.nps.gov/history/hdp/stand...ransmittal.pdf

The new standards describe a digital way to make the "contact" print, but there is no illustration of what it is supposed to look like. Anyone have an example to post or link to?

Any ideas on what to charge for a HABS job? This would take a couple of days at least to shoot because of travel time, plus all the post work.

[schafphoto]

The new standards describe a digital way to make the "contact" print, but there is no illustration of what it is supposed to look like. Anyone have an example to post or link to?

Hi Ed, I have submitted a couple projects on the new HABS/HAER Digital Print Cards. They closely resemble the old "corner cut" mount cards with 5x7 or 4x5 contact prints slipped into the corners. The text is printed in the upper right and the 4x5 or 5x7 image is centered. Jet Lowe and James Rosenthal at HABS in DC can explain the layout further, and that are available by phone if you call the Historic American Buildings Survey office on I street in Washington DC. When I was there last year they were putting a black line around the image when putting it on the page. I've attached some samples.

[schafphoto]

By The Way, the wind tunnel survey project above was not an official document submitted to the HABS and the Library of Congress so it should be noted that I was wrong in using "Historic American Engineering Record" and "HAER" in the header and number. The term of art for this type of unofficial documentation is "HABS-LIKE" or in this case "HAER-LIKE" because it follows the HAER guidelines but is never transmitted to HAER. It was made clear to me in when I visited the Historic Documentation Program (HDP) Department of the National Park Service in Washington DC that one of the big frustrations they have (which confuses a lot of people) is that photographers and architectural historians put the title Historic American Buildings Survey or HAER or HALS on their reports and photos when it is not officially going to HDP or the Library of Congress. You can imagine how unclear this can become when there are surveys floating around that look like HABS reports and have these HABS numbers but HDP does not know of their existence or have any record of them.

The new guideline I'm using and telling my clients to adhere to is "only use THE HABS/HAER/HALS identification and numbering for surveys and donations that are bound for HDP and the Library of Congress". HABS-Like is a made-up term and though used extensively in California to describe CEQA documentation's of structures to mitigate demolitions, most of the HABS-LIKE surveys go into the local museum and are not bound for HDP and the Library of Congress. I've been using a header like: Historic Documentation Photos of 1234 Main Street, So&so, California 2012.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the old-style corner-cut mount card with a 5x7 and a duplicate digital mount card for The Ahwahnee Hotel documentation that was sent to HDP.

[Kirk Gittings]

The problem is that very often clients don't tell you it is not an official submission to H/H/H. They just say its for a "Habs Documentation" and you assume its going to DC. I've had this problem too quite a few times.

[schafphoto]

We do what we can...