Time is running out for America's historic houses - The Art Newspaper:
'via Blog this'
Friday, December 6, 2013
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Issues with the British Library's Endangered Archives Programme
In our class we've spent a lot of
time discussing digitization. I thought it would be interesting to
feature a number of interesting digital projects for this post, but
it turned out somewhat different. I ended up looking at one project
only, and found some troubling things in it and I'd like to discuss
them here.
The project is one being
administered by the British Library that I'm sure many people have
already heard about. The project in question is the British Library's
Endangered Archives Programme. The
idea behind this program is to provide grants to fund the
preservation of collections that are endangered for various reasons.
The end goal would be that the collections would be moved to a safer
location if possible, and also digitized to preserve them in another
format. The project is international in scope, and according to the
web page, it is "re-active" in nature, that is while the
British Library will provide the funds, they will not actively seek
out collections, but will award grants to institutions, groups, or
individuals who apply and are accepted.
This
is definitely the kind of project that needs to be done more
frequently. The collections in question are endangered for numerous
reasons, poor storage being one of the major ones. Here is an
example at the extreme end of things of how some materials were being
stored at a monastery in Ethiopia:
The
paper materials here are actually being stored in a pile in a cave!
Now if that's not an unhappy place for for any kind of documents to
be I really couldn't think of one. I can only guess that the caves
must be very dry, otherwise the documents would probably be long
gone. Interestingly this particular project failed to really get off
the ground. According to the project web page only four manuscripts
were scanned because the permission to scan the rest was revoked by
the local community because of disagreements with the municipal
authorities. Not every situation with a project like this is going
to work out, but I'm more concerned with quality control in general.
Because
the project is "re-active" the projects are apparently
setting their own standards. I've noticed that some of the images
that are being taken are not particularly high resolution. Here is
an image from another archive from Ethiopia:
And a
link to the zoomed in version available on the collection page:
http://eap.bl.uk/database/large_image.a4d?digrec=174887;r=19169
It is
fairly clear from looking at this image that much of this text is
illegible at this resolution. I downloaded the JPEG to my computer
and could not zoom to any real detail with it becoming extremely
pixelated and blurred. I've also seen pages from another collection
where the images of the pages are cropped at the edge and some text
can't be fully seen. The project page does set out guidelines for
scanning and photographing material, but It doesn't seem at all clear
that it is being followed.
I
guess the question that comes to mind is: Why are they shelling out
large amounts of money if there isn't even a basic standard being
followed for the images? To be fair, perhaps these pages are meant
as a preview of higher quality images that would have to be requested
or viewed on site of the British Library? I don't see any indication
that this is the case though. According to the guidelines images of
manuscripts should be at least 300ppi and this image as downloaded is
only 120ppi. Much of the manuscript is viewable at this resolution
as the main body of the text is in larger characters:
The
first few pages that are handwritten may contain important historical
information about this particular volume and it is unfortunate that
they are largely unreadable.
This
is not the only volume or image by any means within the various
collections of this project that is difficult to read. I guess the
next question that comes to mind is: Is some level of work done
better than none at all? And I suppose the answer should probably be
yes? Obviously I'm not involved in this project at all, but it is
incredibly frustrating to see images like this one here:
Which
comes from this document:
http://eap.bl.uk/database/overview_item.a4d?catId=117781;r=24464
It is
difficult for me to understand an outcome like this, not only from
perspective of the photographers, but also from it being uploaded to
this site. As it stands it is little more than a vague
representation of a text in which nothing can be read.
It
seems clear to me that there can be serious consequences with the
type of hands off approach that seems to be being taken by the
British Library in this case. If some of these documents were caught
in a fire or otherwise destroyed tomorrow, the images would be
woefully inadequate representations of the original documents. On
the other hand there are quite a few collections which have good
quality images, and in the case of the previous photograph, the
collection was moved to a better storage location and individual
materials housed in a more proper manner.
I
really think the British Library ought to look closely at this
program and think hard about some of its outcomes. Here are a few
questions they might want to ask:
By
using such a hands off approach can standards really be enforced?
If
higher quality images are available, how can they be integrated into
the digital collections, or how can access be made more straight
forward?
Who is
in charge of quality control of what is being uploaded, and shouldn't
they have some explaining to do as to why some of those images are up
there to begin with?
What
constitutes a useful image and how much does that differ between
different communities of users?
Admittedly
I too still have questions that could use some answering before I
form a more informed opinion, but I'm a little surprised at some of
what I'm seeing here. The British Library is a world class
institution, and I guess I would have expected higher standards than
this. Many collections do in fact have good high quality images, but
that doesn't seem a valid excuse to me to allow some items to be
photographed so poorly as to be virtually useless. I'm certainly not trying to play "gotcha" here, but when dealing with these kinds of documents and this kind of project, it is clear a high level of vigilance is necessary to prevent these kinds of issues from coming up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Endangered Archives at the British Library Homepage :
http://eap.bl.uk/
EAP copying and scanning guidelines:
http://eap.bl.uk/downloads/guidelines_copying.pdf
http://eap.bl.uk/database/results.a4d?projID=EAP432
EAP526: Digitisation of the endangered monastic archive at May Wäyni (Tigray, Ethiopia):
http://eap.bl.uk/database/results.a4d?projID=EAP526
Saturday, November 23, 2013
Social media and the Tate
In her article, Digital
Desires: What Are Museums Up To?, Lanya White mentions Britain's Tate
Museums as a cultural heritage institution actively trying to increase public
participation with the institution's collections through social media.
Investigation of the Tate's social media practices reveal that while the museum
is engaging with people across multiple social media platforms, much of the
content chosen for each platform remains similar; creating different spaces
that encourage similar engagement. This post will provide an overview of the
Tate's current social media practices, their general online presence, and
comments about these practices.
While there are many unique Tate entities, many of which
have their own websites, there is also a central site representing the
institution as a whole (think of it like the Smithsonian - many buildings and
collections all of which are part of the same lead institution). For the
purposes of this post, Tate refers to
the grouping of institutions unless otherwise noted. The structure of all of
the Tate's webpages includes a footer, which includes a "Connect"
category. Direct links to some of the most popular social media sites -
Facebook, Twitter, YouTube - are provided right in the footer, making it
quicker for users to connect to the Tate’s presence at these sites. This same
menu also provides a link to Tate’s Social
media directory, which serves as a dashboard for all of Tate’s social media
presences.
A glance at the Social
media directory reveals the extent to which the Tate has embraced social
media. In addition to the Twitter feed linked in the footer, the Directory displays fifteen additional
Tate institutional feeds as personal feeds for three Tate curators. Content from
these feeds is occasionally re-tweeted by another one of these feeds, such as
the Tate Shop retweeting Tate Publications note about a newly
published book, but otherwise, each of these feeds features unique content
relevant to a particular Tate community. Tate's Twitter practice is echoed in
Facebook; there are seven pages for the institution in addition to the central
Tate page. The Tate Members page
features unique content that would be relevant for those who are members of the
museum: collections, exhibition, and member exclusive events and sales
information are all provided. The other six Facebook pages are each tied to
their respective Twitter pages, providing two access points to content relevant
to their target audiences. Tate offers only a single page on Google plus, just
for the main institution, and it offers the same content as found on the
primary Twitter feed and Facebook page.
In addition to these primarily text based social media
platforms, Tate also maintains presences on several more visually based
outlets: Pinterest, Tumblr, Flickr and Instagram are all represented with one
or two accounts. As would be expected with these sites, the content is not
solely collections based. Theses platforms also offer museum visitors the
opportunity to see themselves engaging with the collections as photos from
events are often featured. The images found here, especially on Flickr and
Instagram, provide visual evidence that the general population, not just
curators, are engaging with the Tate's vast collections at children's events,
dance events, and social events.
One of the unique ways that Tate is providing outreach
through social media is on YouTube. Members since 2005, they have uploaded 516
videos to date, which include interviews with artists, curators, and exhibition
discussions and walk-throughs, and profiles on artists as they create work. The
amount of content on the Tate's YouTube page is staggering, and could serve as
a solid introduction to art history. The most popular of these videos have logged
more than two hundred thousand views, yet while these videos have no doubt
sparked engaging conversation, it is not happening online. Popular videos with
hundreds of comments generally do not feature engaging back and forth criticism
and commentary about the works, but usually and isolated one or two sentence
note that does not ask for further engagement.
The efforts put forth in the Tate's various social media
sites is backed up in the Tate Digital
Strategy 2013-15: Digital as a Dimension of Everything.
Everything.
Here, it becomes clear just how the digital world is to the Tate,
and how social media – part of this digital world - isn’t just something that
happens in the background, but something that is fully integrated into the
Tate’s practice as a 21st century museum. With this in mind, the use
of multiple platforms makes sense. Everything in the museum isn’t presented in
the same manner, nor does every patron who physically enters the space of the
museum interact and react to it in the same manner. By presenting digital
content in myriad ways, the Tate is continuing to allow its patrons to choose
what appeals to them, and how they want to experience art in the digital realm.
For example, content may be duplicated across Twitter, Facebook, and Google +,
but this is not simply due to the lack of interest in creating unique content,
but because these platforms present information in similar ways. It would be
fascinating to learn what percentage of the Tate’s followers keep up with them
digitally using all three of these platforms or if each user tends to frequent
on one platform more than the others. The lack of unique posts to these
platforms suggests that the Tate assumes that its users will favor one site
over another.
The Tate has digitally published their Digital metrics dashboard template, a data set that tracks the
Tate’s online involvement with Twitter and Facebook (among other things) from
June 2012 through June 2013. As of June 2013, Tate had twice as many Twitter
followers as they did on Facebook, yet in both cases, less than one percent of
these followers is considered “engaged.” How can social media be deemed
successful if engagement is either not present or not possible to be tracked?
While digital metrics can easily track the number of re-tweets and shares
associated with online platforms, without holding a focus group or conducting
another type of survey, it remains impossible to track non-digital engagement
with the digital environment. The Digital
metrics shows steady growth in the number of the Tate’s Twitter and
Facebook followers each month. Absent another evaluation tool, that is perhaps
a good way to prove the success of the Tate’s vast social media efforts. As we
approach 2015 and the end of the Tate’s current digital strategy timetable, it
will be interesting to see if additional evaluation tools are employed and if
more is done to examine the success of all of the multitudes of social media
efforts.
Sources:
White, Layna, “Digital Desires: What Are Museums Up To?” Bulletin
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (Online); Apr/May
2008; 34, 4; ABI/INFORM Complete pg. 12.
Tate: Digital metrics: http://www.tate.org.uk/about/our-work/digital/digital-metrics
Tate Digital Strategy
2013-15: Digital as a Dimension of Everything: http://www.tate.org.uk/research/publications/tate-papers/tate-digital-strategy-2013-15-digital-dimension-everything
Tate: Social media
directory: http://www.tate.org.uk/about/our-work/digital/social-media-directory
Tate: http://www.tate.org.uk/
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
From Courtney (Blog 1)
Areas of common practice in LAMs (Libraries, Archives, and Museums) are difficult to produce. The need for language consistency between these three places is crucial if they are to create a common area for research. For example, the term ‘cataloging’ for libraries means creating description for the item where the same term means the classification of objects for museums. This inconsistency would prove difficult when trying to combine the artifacts and information into one resource. For reasons such as this, a need is created to produce a “common overarching international standard” that will encompass the information of the libraries, archives, and museums in question (Shepherd, p 19). According to Shepherd, the International Council on Archive’s Ad Hoc Commission on Archival Description has been trying since 1990 to create common standards for LAMs. They set up data value standards which was meant to control authority files, controlled vocabularies and other terms. Headings for authority records would have to be standardized to create accurate records.
The archivist of the United States, David Ferriero, also understands the need for libraries, archives, and museums to work together in creating terms and vocabulary across disciplines. “We are all in the same business: protecting, collecting, and allowing the use of information,” Ferriero says. The importance of simplicity for the sake of the users cannot be overstated, and to do that these repositories must find common ground. “Users expect to be able to span the scope of knowledge in seconds” according to Ferriero, and we must accomplish this by first deciding how the common system is to describe itself. Many museum curators, according to Professor Holly Witchey of Johns Hopkins University, are not willing to accept the need for integration even though most users demand getting the information they want or need as quickly as possible. They do not want to change the way they operate by compromising with the systems used by archives and libraries. However, the time of LAM integration is nearly a necessity now to keep users interested, so these reluctant curators must find a way to work with the other systems.
The use of consistent language in a LAMs system does create a need for compromise between the three places. They must decide what terms work best for the users, and how to best relay the information they have in a cohesive manner. Though there is reluctance among many places and people who can’t imagine using a different system, most users wish to have a central place to locate their information quickly and easily, and in terms that they can understand.
References
Leddy, C. (2012, April 10). Linking libraries, museums, archives [Electronic version].
Harvard Gazette.
Shepherd, E., & Pringle, R. (2010, August 4). Mapping Descriptive Standards Across
Domains: A comparison of ISAD(G) and SPECTRUM. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 23(1), 17-34.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Social Media at the Bangor Public Library
I decided to do a little investigation
into the Bangor Public Library. The BPL is a sizable public library
that serves Bangor, Maine and the surrounding towns, and has been
around in one form or another since 1830. I'm going to take a look
at BPL's use of social media, and see just how they're doing in this
department.
I'm going to start by looking at BPL's
use of twitter. BPL has been using twitter since at least 2009, and
the tweets have definitely changed over time. The first tweets were
clearly of more of a personal nature, and represent the perspective
of one person. There is mention of official library business, and also quite a few items specific to what the tweeter is doing at work. While
this is sort of fun to read, it seems to lack a unified message.
It's interesting watching the way
tweets are done evolve over time. Eventually the tweets seem to move
away from being in the first person and speak of the library more as
"we". For a time they more to the polar opposite and seem
to be largely extremely dry references to reviews and articles:
Eventually, the tone of the tweets
changes again, and finally in the more present time it seems to
change to something which strikes a good balance; not too dry, but
not focused on one person too much of the time. There is also a nice
trend of significantly more interaction with fellow tweeters:
BPL like many libraries uses twitter to
send out announcements for events, and to engage it's readers
regarding issues with the library and other library-related items.
As I mentioned before, the evolution of its tweets, and observing how
they became more on point and less random is important, as it shows
not only a more coherent policy, but also something that is more
reliable as a source of information..
Bangor Public library also maintains an
active Facebook account which much like its twitter is used for
informing the public of events at the library and general community
outreach. Facebook of course offers the opportunity for more
integrated media rich content than a twitter feed.
One creative way reference staff at BPL
used to reach out to patrons was to hold what was called "question
time" where a particular thread. would be closely monitored and
opened up for the public to ask reference questions that would be
publicly answered on that same thread:
I think this is an excellent idea. Not
only good for public relations, but also for answering questions
remotely. Of course this wouldn't be the forum for more discreet
questions, in this case the public nature of it is part of the fun.
There are various kinds of coding and plug-ins that could be used to
do this live on the library's web site, but I still like this because
it preserves the transcript and also puts it out into the public
sphere, and I think it's a great way to show just how resourceful
reference staff can be. Sadly question time seems to have been
discontinued after the staff member who was the driving force behind
it left.
One other item that seemed a little odd to me
was the blog page:
That's right, BPL has no less than 6
blogs. I guess I wonder why so many, and why some entries couldn't
be condensed into a single blog here. Some blogs are more regularly
updated than others, but unfortunately the only one that seems like
more of a general blog for the whole library has not had an entry
since January of 2012. It follows a not atypical pattern; lots of
posts when it started, and then dropping down to almost none. It's
laudable that the other 5 all have at least one post in the last few
months, but why not condense some of them?
I failed to see any indication of a social media policy on the website, so if one exists I would guess it is for internal use only. I would encourage BPL to take a look at all their blogs as I mentioned before. Perhaps there might even be a way of seeing how often each one is getting viewed as justification for condensing some of them together. If I were to suggest other services, the
first couple that might come to mind might be image driven ones
like Flickr or Pinterest. One good use of this might be more images
of the renovations the library is currently undergoing, or maybe to
show off some of the library's interesting collection items. As far as social media as a whole, I think BPL handles what they use well, but a little more can never hurt!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bangor Public Library on Twitter:
Bangor Public Library on Facebook:
Bangor Public Library Blogs:
Bangor Public Library Home Page:
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)