Digital Asset
Management: Grounds for Collaboration
|
|
|
Scott E. Siddall |
|
Denison University |
Presentation
|
|
|
The Context |
|
Planning the Work |
|
Outlook |
My point?
|
|
|
|
Digital asset management is |
|
Important |
|
Enterprise-wide |
|
Can be sustained and enhanced
only through collaboration and
planning |
The Context
|
|
|
The human need to organize |
The Context
|
|
|
|
How much has been digitized? |
|
Lots, but not enough. |
|
We all have important analog
resources |
|
Just imagine how much hard
drive capacity we’ve used up in the last 20 years |
The Context – evolving
concepts
The Context – what are
digital assets?
|
|
|
|
Images |
|
Some common and some unique |
|
Quality varies enormously |
|
Audio and video |
|
multiple formats including
streaming |
|
Texts and images of texts |
|
PDFs, Word, OCR, searchable or
not |
|
Learning objects |
|
simple and compound (entire
course content) |
|
URLs |
The Context – what are
digital assets?
|
|
|
OK….anything digital… |
|
|
|
Binary Large Objects (BLOBs) |
The Context - databases
to the rescue
The Context - databases
to the rescue
|
|
|
|
Objects can be digital assets
themselves |
|
digital video clips, digital
images of events, PDFs |
The Context - DAM databases
|
|
|
|
Binary content cannot itself be
easily searched, indexed |
The Context – metadata
is crucial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Librarians have crafted
metadata for decades |
|
Data about data |
|
Metadata: |
|
Describes item |
|
Facilitates management,
description and preservation |
|
Enables discovery of item |
|
Several schema (read open
standards) |
|
MARC record in the OPAC |
|
Database of bibliographic and
item records |
|
Searchable, indexed |
|
Cataloged objects are textual,
physical, digital |
The Context – metadata
is crucial
|
|
|
|
DC – Dublin Core |
|
http://dublincore.org |
|
METS – Metadata Encoding and
Transmission Standard |
|
http://www.log.gov/standards/mets/ (works with OAI) |
|
TEI – Text Encoding Initiative |
|
http://www.tei-c.org/ |
|
VRA – Visual Resources Association |
|
http://vraweb.org/ |
|
EAD – Encoded Archival Description |
|
http://www.loc.gov/ead/ |
|
CDWA – Categories for the Description of Art |
|
http://www.getty.edu/research/institute/standards/cdwa/ |
|
RDF – Resource Description Framework |
|
An XML standard |
The Context – metadata
is expensive
|
|
|
|
Time required for content
specialists to create and proof key fields of metadata |
|
Balancing metadata quality with
results |
|
Risks of not finding materials |
|
Risks of “dirty” results |
|
Perfect can be the enemy of
good |
The Context – metadata
is expensive
The Context – the market
|
|
|
|
Scope and size of DAM market |
|
$1.5-3.0 billion annually; $320
million in profits |
|
600+ vendors with 1,200+
applications |
|
Ripe for consolidation |
|
The commercial players |
|
Artesia (publishing) |
|
Canto (desktop to small
workgroup) |
|
eMotion (broadcast) |
|
MediaBin by Interwoven
(corporate) |
|
North Plains ‘Telescope’
(publishing) |
|
Webware (corporate) |
|
IBM and Stellent (corporate) |
|
Extensis (desktop to small
workgroup) |
The Context – The higher
ed niche
|
|
|
|
|
The higher education market
players |
|
Auto-Graphics Digital Asset
Management |
|
CONTENTdm (e.g., Univ.
of Puget Sound’s collections) |
|
Documentum DAM |
|
Dynix Horizon Digital Library |
|
Endeavor ENCompass |
|
Ex Libris Digitool |
|
Innovative Interfaces
Millennium Metasource |
|
Luna Imaging Insight |
|
SIRSI Hyperion |
|
VTLS VITAL |
|
(Why or why not integrate into
campus OPAC?) |
The Context – open
source
|
|
|
|
|
Open source DAM systems |
|
FEDORA Flexible Extensible Digital Object and
Repository Architecture |
|
Release 1.2.1 released April
20, 2004 |
|
Digital Library Extension
Service |
|
from the University of Michigan |
|
Greenstone |
|
e.g., Chopin collection at the
University of Chicago |
|
Madison Digital Image Database |
|
MDID; v2.0 in July |
|
And homegrown systems |
|
e.g., Whitman Image Project |
The Context - ARTstor
|
|
|
|
The art history and image
equivalent of JSTOR |
|
Funded by the Mellon Foundation |
|
“Grand Opening” on July 1 |
|
http://artstor.org |
Slide 20
Slide 21
Slide 22
The Context - ARTstor
|
|
|
|
|
Subscription basis |
|
300k images, largely art and
art history |
|
Pilot of hosting for campuses,
individuals |
|
Addresses intellectual property
issues |
|
Federated searching to discover
ARTstor and local content through one interface |
|
High resolution images |
|
Scene7’s Infinite Imaging
Platform |
|
Individual accounts |
|
Provide workspaces, instructor
tools |
|
Allows annotations |
|
Images and groups of images
(searches, gatherings) have a URL for insertion into CMS |
The Context – ARTstor
|
|
|
|
|
Offline Viewer |
|
Analog to walking around with
slide trays |
|
Local application |
|
Downloads encrypted JPEGs |
|
Protects IP of image owners |
|
Allows ARTstor collections to
be used in non-networked environments |
Planning the Work
|
|
|
What’s it take to implement a
successful DAM project? |
|
|
|
Planning, planning and planning |
|
|
|
With all stakeholders = |
|
Grounds for collaboration |
Planning the Work
|
|
|
Set goals, scope and get
political support |
|
What is the nature of the
content? |
|
Who is the audience? |
|
How will the collection be
accessed and used? |
|
Select and customize metadata
scheme |
|
Who is going to catalog
objects? |
|
Is the infrastructure ready? |
|
How will cataloging quality be
assessed and enforced? |
|
Set digitization standards |
|
Evaluate and select software
and hardware |
|
How are projects and even
objects selected? |
|
How will copyrights be managed? |
|
Is there a campus IP policy? |
Planning the Work -
goals
|
|
|
|
|
What’s a collection? |
|
Institutional holdings |
|
Galleries |
|
Museum exhibits |
|
Historical societies |
|
Special collections |
|
Archives |
|
Faculty collections |
|
Learning objects |
|
eReserves |
|
Emeriti collections |
|
Research and teaching
collections |
|
Student collections |
|
ePortfolios |
Planning the Work -
goals
|
|
|
|
|
Collections can be: |
|
Discipline-based |
|
one or more departments |
|
From consortia of similar
institutions |
|
Thematic collections from
dissimilar institutions |
|
public and academic libraries,
museums, historical societies |
|
Centralized or distributed for
federated searching |
Planning the Work -
goals
|
|
|
|
Other types of “collections” |
|
Public affairs campus photos |
|
Senior theses |
|
Products of faculty scholarship |
|
Managed documents |
Planning the Work -
standards
|
|
|
Selecting metadata schemes |
Planning the Work -
standards
|
|
|
|
Setting |
|
digitization |
|
standards… |
|
|
|
1600 x 1200 at 24 bit color depth |
|
JPEG2000 |
|
For printing |
|
Color management |
Planning the Work
|
|
|
|
|
Technologies |
|
Server selections |
|
Storage and backup requirements |
|
Bandwidth |
|
Media types, streaming |
|
Client selections |
|
Plug-ins, thick and thin
clients |
|
Piloting and assessing the
software |
Planning the Work
Planning the Work -
software specifications
|
|
|
Allows collaborative and
distributed collection development/management |
|
Platform (hardware, operating
system) agnostic – server and client |
|
Web-based client with
easy-to-use interface |
|
Basic and advanced searching
across collections, across sites (federated searches, virtual collections,
stored result sets) |
|
Common client-side
players/viewers |
|
Client tools for manipulation,
comparison, per-user annotation |
|
Flexible support for metadata
standards |
|
Support for many object
formats, and developing formats (e.g., jpeg 2000) |
|
Support for high-resolution,
zoom-in features |
|
Supports Unicode text for
display and searching |
|
URL access to objects |
|
Customizable display interface |
|
Based on open standards
(database, metadata, etc.) |
|
Flexible access control list
features |
|
Standards-based export
functions to avoid “lock-in” and promote remote indexing |
Planning the Work -
workflow
Planning the Work
|
|
|
|
Who’s going to catalog the
objects? |
|
Automated metadata creation |
|
Video analysis can produce
metadata |
|
Image capture with data |
Planning the Work –
collaborate!
|
|
|
Multiple goals |
|
Range of standards |
|
Cross political boundaries |
|
Shared control, responsibility |
|
Expensive metadata |
|
|
|
Collaboration is not optional |
|
|
Planning the Work –
collaborate!
|
|
|
Faculty collaborating with
librarians, technologists and students |
|
Institutional representatives
collaborating to plan cataloging and access to campus collections |
|
Consortial representatives
planning metadata structures for regional projects |
|
|
Outlook – the market
|
|
|
|
Market effects on the higher ed
niche |
|
Consolidation of vendors |
|
Push to portals and enterprise
wide solutions |
|
Open source developments will
pressure commercial offerings, and may eventually replace some |
Outlook – the tools
|
|
|
|
Proprietary systems may “lock
in” content with tools |
|
Open standards and
interoperability will be a “must have” |
|
|
Outlook – the tools
|
|
|
|
Large institutions: |
|
Different tools for asset
management, content management, document management, etc. |
|
|
|
Small institutions: |
|
one tool serving many needs |
Outlook - our needs
|
|
|
|
|
Faculty need to experiment with
DAM tools as part of planning process |
|
We must collaborate to avoid
reinventing wheels, to sustain DAM projects |
|
We need better searching tools,
metadata automation, digital rights management |
|
DAM will become an important
enterprise application – right behind ERP and CRM |
|
DAM tools will eventually be
integrated into portals |
Conclusion?
|
|
|
|
Digital asset management…. |
|
Is important today |
|
Will be enterprise-wide
tomorrow |
|
Can be sustained and enhanced
only through collaboration and
planning |
Resources
|
|
|
|
Vendors focused on the higher
education market |
|
ARTstor |
|
Auto-Graphics Digital Asset
Management |
|
CONTENTdm |
|
Documentum DAM |
|
Dynix Horizon Digital Library |
|
Endeavor ENCompass |
|
Ex Libris Digitool |
|
Innovative Interfaces
Millennium Metasource |
|
Luna Imaging Insight |
|
SIRSI Hyperion |
|
VTLS Vital |
|
|
|
Bitter Harvest (discussion of
OAI harvesting issues) |
|
Global Society for Asset
Management |
|
EContent’s Research Center on
DAM (news) |
|
Digital Asset Management
Symposium (annual event) |
|
Journal of Digital Asset
Management |
|
Digital Asset Management in the
Liberal Arts (proceedings of a symposium) |
|
Digital Asset Management
Initiative at the University of Michigan |
|
OhioLINK Digital Media Center |
|
Preserving Cornell's Digital
Image Collections |
|
Digital Imaging Tutorial from
Cornell |
|
Research Library Group’s Guides
to Quality in Visual Resource Imaging |
|
|
|
|
|
|