_____
From: Nilsen, Dianne
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 9:48 AM
To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu'
Subject: FW: Can a CIS be a DAMS too?
This message is being resubmitted to the MCN List, now that it is up and
running again. If you already received it, please forgive the
redundancy. Thanks in advance to any of you who have the time and
inclination to share your thoughts. Special thanks to Marla Misunas and
Tim Au Yeung for comments they have sent to me personally.
_____
From: Nilsen, Dianne
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 12:01 PM
To: 'mcn-l at mcn.edu'
Subject: Can a CIS be a DAMS too?
Dear All,
I am seeking collective wisdom from this group to help me with a unique
opportunity here at the Center for Creative Photography. We've
purchased a new collection information system (CIS) and are in the joint
application development stage with our vendor, Minisis. We selected
their product, MINT, because it integrates three distinctly designed
modules for management of art collections, archival collections and
bibliographic collections. The director and CEO, Christopher Burcsik,
is willing to create new data element fields so that we can capture
technical and preservation metadata relating specifically to digital
objects. I hope to end up with a "hybrid" system that will serve our
needs for collection management and digital assets management for our
holdings of nearly 80,000 photographs and selected archival material.
Hence the question, "Can a CIS be a DAMS too?"
If you are so kind to respond to this long message, please note that we
have the descriptive and administrative metadata mapping processes well
underway in preparation for migration. It is the metadata that relates
specifically to digital objects that I am concerned with here. My task
is to come up with all the new data elements to use during the
digitization process and to automate the capture of technical and
preservation metadata as much as possible.
One specific concept I've discussed with Minisis and would greatly
appreciate your comments on is customizing the system to parse technical
metadata that is automatically captured by scanning devices (and
imbedded in the image files), into individual element fields in the
database. I wonder if this innovation might prove useful in the future,
because it would allow us to export custom, detailed technical reports
with images in XML format for web projects and collaborative digital
initiatives. I also wonder if having technical metadata stored outside
the image files in searchable fields would prove useful for future
migration or for tasks such as documenting format conversions.
Christopher tells me it is possible to parse the data, but before we
take advantage of his time and generosity, I'd like to hear perspectives
from any of you who may be dealing with similar challenges.
To elaborate a bit, some technical metadata is automatically captured by
the scanning back we use (BetterLight Super 6K2) and a huge amount of
metadata is captured by our digital SLRs. I have been studying the NISO
Z39.87 document, Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images, but the
number of fields in that document is over the top in regard to the
Center's needs. The architecture of Minisis, I understand, is such that
selected key data elements can be clustered together, as might be handy
when describing differently sized image files representing the same
original object. For example; Master File location; format; image size;
pixel dimensions; color space; RGB values; calibration target; etc.,
might be part of one cluster of data elements for a capture TIFF (some
automated and some batched in). Other clusters might include individual
data elements for variously sized cropped JPEG versions such as; ZOOM;
Full page; Preview; Thumbnail; or other data elements such as might be
specific to a derivative in JPEG2000 format.
In regard to preservation metadata, I've been looking primarily at the
PREMIS data model and data dictionary. I am struggling with the
question: "How much information is required to sustain our digital
assets over time as technology changes?" Although I admire the work of
this group, I find this document overwhelming, as well. Have any of you
come up with a template for implementing preservation metadata elements
into your digital asset management processes?
I've attached a sample training document for capture of original
photographs here at the Center, just for reference. 95% of the time,
original objects are already fully catalogued before they reach the
imaging studio. I need to add the entry of (non-automated) digital
object metadata to our CIS, within our scanning workflow, most likely at
the point where the master scans are optimized and the derivatives are
linked to their corresponding records (We also plan to automate the
image optimizing process more in the future, possibly utilizing Adobe
Bridge and JPEG2000 format for all derivatives)
Many thanks in advance for taking time out of busy days to read this
long message, share your comments, expertise and any random thoughts on
the validity of the ideas above. If any of you have already created
templates for capture of technical or preservation metadata on your own,
and are willing to share details I will appreciate it greatly. Please
feel free to email me directly.
Dianne
dnilsen at ccp.library.arizona.edu
Dianne Nilsen
Head of Digital Initiatives & Imaging
Center for Creative Photography
University of Arizona
P.O. Box 210103
Tucson, Arizona 85721-0103
Phone 520-307-2829
Fax 520-621-9444
<mailto:dnilsen at ccp.library.arizona.edu>
http://www.creativephotography.org <http://www.creativephotography.org/>
