OFFICIAL BLOG POST, click here.
very rough draft of a finding aid (will be replaced with official final version on ANS website)
Older informal write up and partial draft of material linked above.
I am so excited about all the hard work of so many people who have made this possible. Richard Schaefer for his decades of work and deep generosity; Lucia Carbone for believing we could make this happen, marshaling the resources, connecting all the moving parts, and always pushing me to do more; Erin Richardson for her many hours, days, and weeks of photography; and especially ETHAN GRUBER for taking on the technical challenges and making it happen; and all the good people at the ANS who made this possible.
This is only a part of what is coming in this initial release of images. Missing from this preliminary release are all the drawers of output images (photographs of specimens not in the binders) and RRC types designed as ODEC = One Die for Each Control-mark. Getting these on Archer and similarly connected to CRRO is the next step.
Gruber’s blog post on the state of the work right now
Our joint write up on the project as a whole for the ANS Magazine
To find a Crawford number the easiest way (to my mind) is go to CRRO and find the type you want, open it and then click on Annotations.
This jumps you down to this part of the page. To go right to the first illustration in the binder of the type click on the first section number. If you click on the title where it says Schaefer binder one it will take you to the first page of the binder.
Once you’re in the binder, scroll down for a list of all types illustrated in that binder, and then use the list of section numbers in parentheses to jump around as needed.
You can also just type the RRC number in the Archersearch field and it will spit out the right binder and then you can use the index to jump to your type.
If you want to flip through the binders here they are:
The zoom level is great (I use my mouse scroll to zoom in fast).
1 thought on “Schaefer’s Binders Online! (RRDP)”
[…] conversations I’m seeing linking to my earlier blog post on various discussion boards are expressing confusion over how to read Schaefer’s work. […]