Another great resource from Getty. The Introduction to Imaging by Howard Besser not only provides information about digitizing analog content for a digital collection, but also gives a great overview of the entire process of creating a digital collection. It includes plenty of detailed info on scanners, digital images, system architecture, project planning, and digital preservation and sustainability. Add it to your bookmarks or download the pdf files.
Source: Introduction to Imaging, Revised Edition, by Howard Besser, edited by Sally Hubbard and Deborah Lenert
It’s been a full weekend of deciphering football pictures. My process in indexing was to start with the automatic data entries, then move on to the interpretive analysis part. I made notes starting with all visible player numbers and what team. Then I tried to match up names from rosters. Like others have noted, figuring out the player using the roster and position was not easy for me. I had to double check what was offense and what was defense, and reversed my assessment a couple of times. I made a spreadsheet, but with all the back-and-forth between rosters and guidelines, I found handwritten notes easier to modify. Some of you will laugh, but it was an aha moment when I realized the game in Pasadena was a championship game and not the Rose Bowl. I admit it. Maybe when fall football season comes I will have a new-found interest in the sport. Roll Tide. ; )
Posting questions via social media is helpful not only for answering the questions I have, but also for alerting me to questions I didn’t know I had. Reading through other classmates’ questions and answers has prompted me to go back, re-read guidelines, and check and tweak some data value entries I wouldn’t have thought to do otherwise.
Just a shout-out to Tamara on the Spatial Coverage Element for the football images including the linked geo-location — so cool! Seems like really robust metadata — meta-metadata. Tamara also did a great job of explaining what to do in the guidelines.
I’ve been entering Unknown for Date Created with the DePol images if there was no information provided. But for other unknown information, I have just skipped it—like for Spatial and Temporal Coverage. Is this okay or inconsistent?
Also, seems like I remember reading somewhere that entering Unknown means that it is unknowable. The values may be knowable, I just don’t know them. Probably not a crucial point, but thought I’d put it out there. Any thoughts?
I believe this was brought up in another blog post, but can’t locate it. In Omeka, when entering multiple values in an open field, I’ve been entering the additional values separately.
For example, in Format, I entered image/jpeg in the open field, then selected “add input” to add pixel size separately. Same with Relation element for adding multiple identifiers.
Is this was the way to go about it? Any thoughts?
A fellow classmate blogged about indexing with limited information recently. I too have been debating the best approach to handling this as I make my way through indexing the images.
For example, one of the DePol images is clearly (to me) a Biblical illustration. A hint that this is the case is in the title of the image just before it: Fisherman of Galilee. I went ahead and assigned subject content values (title, subject terms, etc.) even though I do not have any provided information to go on. I wonder if this is interjecting too much. Otherwise the content description would be so vague, it wouldn’t be very useful.
I also considered trying to add temporal coverage of Biblical times, but here my uncertainty was too great. Decided better to leave blank than enter something erroneously.