LUNA Imaging is developing a personal collection feature.  It manages personal collections with the same Insight software as is used for the institutional collections -- and on the same servers.  It resembles the software for the institutional collection in nearly every way but has the capability of providing separate collection security and separate record structures.  This feature was alpha tested in February with the Cal. Digital Library (at UCI).  A real prof with a real collection of digital images spent 4 hours working with the software and discussing it with observers.  She found the process of adding a collection very easy to learn, liked the easy batch processing of image groups, appreciated having the full complement of Insight "image work space" features while cataloging (light table re-groupings, zooming, etc.), and was glad to see that Insight tends to keep the image and its metadata together in its export features. The major fault she found with this version was being limited to 3 templates for record structures -- as soon as she understood the available records she was eager to customize for her specific collection needs.  There were also some interface and documentation glitches -- as is typical with interfaces that are rich in features and choices.  (e.g. using the control key to select multiple images).  The test subject noticed that it was difficult to record relationships between images (such as the narrative sequence of several images) -- something that many of us have noticed with many other systems.

Collaborative:  users want to contribute and/or use images from subject based projects (e.g., non-canonical African resources at UCSB; Japanese theatrical productions at UCI and Cornell)

Incidental for teaching:  e.g., image of safety pin on diaper and on punk rocker as illustration of how images take on different meanings depending on context.  Might want to reuse this type of image for another lecture but it prob. doesn’t deserve institutional management; getting it from Google is good enough. “Local and dynamic”

LMS: including homegrown components like “Gallery” and Quizzer (random images for student identification) at UCB

Areas we identified but didn’t have time to discuss are outlined on our handout. Please ask questions about these as well. (elaborate a little if time) Incentives: students want it and a sense that it’s the wave of the future, but content and productivity improvements are the real motivators Metadata: involves aggregation problems; role of user supplied; special needs for research; system supplements or compensations for inadequate info Content migration: may be needed across platforms, due to format, standards changes; need to ensure integrity of data and image files; workflow issues