Why The Archiver?
Compare The Archiver against the traditional approaches. The difference isn't just speed — it's sustainability.
faster to draft metadata than manual description, typically
export from day one
items free to start — no card needed
Comparing approaches — not named products.
| The Archiver | Spreadsheets | Manual cataloguing | Expensive CMS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to searchable collection | Minutes to hours | Weeks to months | Months to years | Weeks (setup alone) |
| Cost | Free to start; affordable at scale | Free upfront; high staff cost | Very high staff cost | High licence + implementation fees |
| Standards compliance | ✓ ISAD(G), EAD3, Dublin Core | ✗ Manual effort required | ~ Depends on cataloguer | ~ Varies by product |
| EAD3 export | ✓ Built in | ✗ Not available | ✗ Requires separate tool | ~ Sometimes, at extra cost |
| AI assistance | ✓ Full AI cataloguing + research | ✗ None | ✗ None | ✗ Rarely included |
| Scalability | ✓ Scales with your collection | ✗ Breaks down at scale | ✗ Linear cost increase | ~ Scales, but expensive |
| Funder-ready outputs | ✓ NLHF-ready EAD3 & BagIt | ✗ No | ~ Manual export needed | ~ Varies |
| Technical setup required | ✓ None — works in browser | ✓ None | ✓ None | ✗ Significant |
The real cost
Manual cataloguing is expensive — not just in pounds, but in years.
A skilled archivist can catalogue around 10–20 items per day when working methodically to a recognised standard. For a collection of 5,000 items, that represents a minimum of 250 working days — more than a full year of staff time, before any other duties are accounted for.
Spreadsheets appear cheap but don't scale. Without a standardised data model, every new cataloguer introduces inconsistencies. Without export pipelines, the data is stranded. Without search infrastructure, the catalogue is a filing cabinet.
Expensive CMS platforms offer structure, but their implementation costs, ongoing licences, and dependency on specialist technical support put them out of reach for most small and medium heritage organisations.
The Archiver gives you professional-grade cataloguing infrastructure — AI-powered, standards-aligned, and human-reviewed — at a fraction of the cost and time of any alternative. AI generates draft records; your team reviews, corrects, and approves every one before it enters the catalogue.
Common Questions
How is The Archiver different from a spreadsheet?
Spreadsheets are flat lists with no indexing, no OCR, no standards compliance, and no search infrastructure. The Archiver generates structured, ISAD(G)-aligned metadata automatically, makes your collection fully searchable, and exports in archival formats like EAD3 and BagIt.
Why not just hire more cataloguers?
A skilled archivist catalogues around 10–20 items per day. For a backlog of 5,000 items, that is over a year of full-time work. The Archiver processes the same volume in days — with AI generating draft records and your team reviewing and approving.
Can The Archiver replace our existing CMS?
The Archiver is a cataloguing tool, not a full collections management system. It handles the description and metadata generation stage, then exports in standard formats (EAD3, CSV, Dublin Core) that import cleanly into your existing CMS.
What if we already have a partially catalogued collection?
The Archiver works with any starting point. Upload your uncatalogued items and the AI generates catalogue records for them. Your existing records are unaffected — you are adding to your catalogue, not replacing it.