Hi Perian, We made the decision to put low-quality shots in our database and online. Because if we waited until we photographed everything beautifully, we'd never get done. We also wanted to provide access to the collection (our mission) and this was one way to do it.
However, you're right. This causes a big R&R headache. Now that people know what we have, they want to reproduce it. Which means we have to go back and photograph the object to give them a high quality image. Big impact on the staff and the objects. And they ask for the most esoteric things that will never be displayed. So it's hard to try to anticipate what people will want to reproduce and shoot accordingly ahead of time. Despite the added headaches, I think it's better to stick to our mission and provide access to the collection. There are of course ways to streamline the photo process so you get reasonably good photos, instead of snapshots. Contact me off line if you want to hear details. Sue -- Susan Grinols Director Photo Services and Imaging Fine Arts Museums of San Francisco Ph. 415.750.3602 Fx. 415.750.2679 sgrinols at famsf.org On 7/29/09 3:09 PM, "Perian Sully" <psully at magnes.org> wrote: > Hi all: > > > > In the interest of streamlining our collections inventory (down from 3-4 > years to 6 months - EEK!), we're cutting back on taking more formal > studio shots of objects and simply doing brief snapshots. > > > > We're also just about to release our database online, and we only have > about 2000 images available of the museum objects (out of 14,000 records > and growing). I'm trying to decide if I should release these low-quality > snapshots to the public or not. > > > > Pros: > > Image assets are always good > > Helps researchers and us > > We already have crappy photos publically available, so this wouldn't > change much > > > > Cons: > > Potential for rights & reproduction requests for objects safely tucked > in a box and irretrievable > > Not the best photos in the world and many are useless for research use > (no marks, inscriptions, etc., except in the description) > > > > I'm leaning toward the pros outweighing the cons, but I'm wondering if > someone else has dealt with this issue and how? Is it better to just > leave them off the site altogether? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Perian Sully > > Collections Information Manager > > Web Programs Strategist > > The Magnes > > 2911 Russell St. > > Berkeley, CA 94705 > > Work: 510-549-6950 x 357 > > Fax: 510-849-3673 > > http://www.magnes.org > > http://www.musematic.org > > http://www.mediaandtechnology.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer > Network (http://www.mcn.edu) > > To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu > > To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: > http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l > > The MCN-L archives can be found at: > http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/
