DIGITAL IMAGE SYSTEMS COME OF AGE (BUT WHEN WILL THEY GROW UPUniversity Libraries Amy J. Harbur212004-04-12T13:31:00Z2004-04-24T01:00:00Z2004-04-24T01:00:00Z16223546The Pennsylvania State University298416011.5604

DIGITAL IMAGE SYSTEMS COME OF AGE (BUT WILL THEY EVER GROW UP?)Image Service Demonstrator Project (ISDP), California Digital Library, 2003 to presentVisual Image User Study (VIUS), Pennsylvania State University, 2001-2003

SIMILARITIES IN THE TWO PROJECTS

Goals:

Assess user needs for digital delivery of still images

Findings in Common

Content is a (or the) primarily determinate of use. Some needs for content are local and dynamic.

Users' incentives for going digital:

student expect it & faculty sense that digital is "inevitable"

anticipated improvements in productivity

Users' obstacles to going digital:

classroom equipment (availability, reliability, complexity)

large analog collections

perception of increased labor and/or learning

Collections maintained by individuals are important resources. *

widespread (1 in 3 of all faculty – 1 in 4 students -- 44% of picture users)

often contain unique knowledge or perspectives & often clear rights

often digital

Collections maintained by individuals are poorly described. *

but detailed metadata often in the collector's head

Faculty collectors want institutional support. *

for labor, advice, software, and/or applications

Many faculty interested in sharing with colleagues or students.

especially collaborative research & often teaching materials

both with desire to control the terms of sharing

Image tools should not be too closely tied to retrieval systems. *

Many sources used for presentations

Use often requires other systems (learning management, etc.)

Many want to edit images (resize, contrast, etc.)

Heavy image users want to choose their own viewer

In classrooms, portable media are still preferred to live connections

Aggregation (one-stop shopping) is especially desirable to students.

Aggregation brings special metadata problems.

mapping of data structures

variations in descriptive practice - no equivalent of AACR2

Loss of context: which collection, where in collection, permitted uses

Unconventional metadata interests many users.

user contributed description, annotations, persistent "slide trays"

specific information on rights and permitted uses

Logistics are manifold (platforms, future migrations, etc.) Work and data flow integrity essential.

Partnerships among users, librarians, educational technologists, visual resource curators seem to have increasing value.

(

These items are the focus of the presentation for the Digital Library Federation Spring 2004 Forum.)

Image Service Demonstrator Project (ISDP), California Digital Library

(continued)Visual Image User Study (VIUS), Pennsylvania State University

(continued)

VARIATIONS IN THE TWO PROJECTS

CDL ISDP

PSU VIUS .

Purpose:

Primarily service implementation

Primarily

research

Disciplines:

Visual arts, cultural materials, (medical

Arts, humanities, environmental studies

coming

soon)

Institutional Collections:

Many to aggregate

Few to aggregate

Several Internet accessible

Few Internet accessible

Licensed images:

Aggregating as many as possible

Aggregating

only those with no other delivery

system

Research methods:

Focus groups, interviews, small scale

Large and small

surveys,

focus groups,

surveys

interviews, logging, protocols

Software selected:

LUNA

Imaging's

Insight

CONTENTdm

and

LionShare

Variations in Findings:

Image quality significant user obstacle

Image quality less of an obstacle

Coordination of institutional collections

Coordination of Institutional collections less

complex

Website:

www.cdlib.org/inside/projects/image/

www.libraries.psu.edu/vius

/ [and]

lionshare.its.psu.edu/main/

Contact:

Laine Farley,

Henry Pisciotta,

Director, Digital Library Services

Arts and Architecture Librarian

laine.farley@ucop.edu, 510 987-0552

henryp@psu.edu, 814 865-6778