[Insightl] ArtSTOR interoperability / "Offline Viewer"
issues
Daniel Bridgman
dbridgma at email.smith.edu
Tue Aug 3 13:28:40 EDT 2004
Over the course of the past year Smith participated in a kind of
"interoperability test" with ARTstor content delivered through the
Insight interface. Last April that experiment seemed enough of a
success that our staff tacitly sanctioned significant
cross-collection group-building for our most aggressive digital
users. A case in point were the 8000 images that were gleaned for
potential use in three upcoming survey courses. Our campus was
noticeably abuzz with the prospect of wedding multiple subscription
& local collections on the scale that ARTstor afforded. There was palpable optimism as we witnessed delivery of merged content in online presentation, as well as
offline (Powerpoint) modules.
In June, however, we learned that, due to licensing
restrictions--not technical obstacles, ARTstor content would
henceforth be delivered exclusively in their secured browser
interface, and now an offline viewer option has been proffered.
While we see why these decisions make sense to the ARTstor board,
from our perspective and past experience, the exclusivity
restrictions foreclose (and at the least forestall) a six-month vista
upon a bright horizon of digital possibility. During the winter of
2004 we glimpsed what it would be like to quickly prepare and
deliver content from half a million images drawn equally from AMICO,
ARTstor, David Rumsey, Saskia, Davis Art Slide, & local collections.
We cannot express how promising this short-lived test was for our
development staff and constituencies.
That said, our institutional libraries have already subscribed to the
ARTstor service, and our teaching community will return to campus this fall to find that they have access to ARTstor content only through the ARTstor interface--not through Insight and its 15,000 image library, as they did this past year. AS collections will live only in the prescribed AS interface apart from our preferred pedagogical delivery mechanism: Insight 5.0.
We have urged James Shulman to keep an open mind about API
interoperability between, let's say, MDID, Insight, VIA, etc. James
has confirmed a willingness to listen and to keep the dialogue open, although he has made it clear that ARTstor's priorities cannot be those of the Insight user community.
At this juncture the key piece of software and functionality is the
ARTstor offline viewer. As demonstrated, it supports
download and encrypted protection of 1600x1600 pixel images and ingestion of desktop user content, but is not slated to allow export of content. The offline viewer is designed to ingest image files (and metadata in a later release) for use on a single desktop computer. Even with the addition of a promised data editor, as well as a sync-with-online-collections function, we remain perplexed by the direction and stated development goals. For example, a significant quantity of our local content is purchased & licensed from electronic vendors (Saskia). For this reason we cannot yet envision how we would negotiate the legal and functional gymnastics of allowing such licensed content to be ingested, much less "synced" up to an ARTstor server. If someone has a solution for this problem, in particular, we would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
In addition, even if ARTstor off/online development proceeds
according to plan, we are scrambling to salvage four months
of laborious effort stored in cross-collection groups that grow
inaccessible at the moment that the requisite ARTstor collections are shut
off. Across the longer term, we are facing a situation in which we are obliged to reduplicate a significant chunk of the survey content that ARTstor is publishing in its Image Gallery*an enterprise we postponed in the hopes that a subscription service would one day address for a fee. But if we want to use survey content in the classroom with our other pedagogical collections, we must redevelop those same monument lists in Insight. Because we have now spent six years building content for teaching in Insight, a process for which we've paid dearly in man/woman hours and classroom training and trust, we feel we cannot simply abandon these efforts and embrace the still unproven ARTstor browser solution.
Anecdotal evidence that we have gathered indicates that the reception of ARTstor
content in its most interoperable form (i.e., in Insight) was overwhelmingly positive. The use of ARTstor collections in conjunction with local ones was an eye-opener and cogent planning tool for the teaching community at Smith. As a
matter of fact, cross-collection group building (usually 3, 4 or 5
collections) became a prime activity amongst the three instructors who were most keenly attuned the ARTstor collections.
As the academic community continues to assess their digital access options, we urge ARTstor and ARTstor subscribers to ponder the scope and direction of their software. Only time will tell if subscription contents can find their way through a variety of secure and clever applications to image-hungry constituencies. We believe ARTstor can and should play a leadership role in this arena.
>Daniel Bridgman
Visual Communication Specialist
Educational Technology Services
Smith College, Northampton, MA 01063
413 585-3398
>>> Stephen Paul Davis <daviss at columbia.edu> 08/02/04 8:19 PM >>>
>David: Thanks for responding. I know that the ARTStor folks follow this
>list, so it's good for as many institutions as possible to make their
>diverse needs and priorities known. I did get a note from James Shulman
>after my original posting, saying they were in the process of preparing a
>statement addressing the interoperability question.
>
>I also wanted to ask folks on this list who are at institutions that have
>tested or licensed Artstor whether they are using the Artstor "Offline
>Viewer" for classroom presentations. My understanding is that art history
>instructors and faculty here at Columbia have all pretty much accepted
>Powerpoint as the standard for classroom use at this point. And although
>some of them would very much like to use the higher-quality versions of
>Artstor images, they are resistant -- initially at least -- to using the
>Artstor Offline Viewer, particularly if it means having to migrate their
>entire presentation over to it.
>
>So ... once Artstor does in fact allow for interoperability with local and
>other national systems and our faculty can easily search and 'discover'
>Artstor content along with other image content, we still need to make sure
>that faculty can easily make use of the Artstor images they've
>found. Otherwise we'll continue to get pressure to scan our own slide
>collections locally so they can display higher quality images in the
>classroom using Powerpoint.
>
>Do others have any tips or experiences on this topic they could share? Is
>this going to be just a transitional problem?
>
>[Sorry if this stuff about Artstor seems "off message" for a lot of Insight
>users; it actually is a pretty significant issue for those of us who are
>trying to figure out whether and how to introduce Artstor to our campuses
>when we've already built an image discovery & delivery strategy around
>Insight. And it's not like there's a glut of other postings, now is there? ;]
>
>Stephen Paul Davis
>Director, Libraries Digital Program
>Columbia University
>
>
>At 12:34 PM 8/2/2004, David Lower wrote:
>>Thank you, Stephen, for raising dialogue about using both Insight and
>>ARTstor. I might offer an even stronger differentiation between your choice
>>#2, which is the way ARTstor positioned itself in sales presentations until
>>this year, and #'s 3 and 5, which are what I might put in the category of
>>"almost, but not quite bearable".
>>
>>I agree with Susan, that the user experience must be considered as primary.
>>Though there may be some nifty political or contractual maneuvering that
>>could be done to find some compromise alternative, anything short of a
>>single access point for digital media (in Insight) will only confuse and
>>discourage use of the technology.
>>
>>The context as we see it is this: many faculty here at Emory have been happy
>>and comfortable using slides, so any digital alternative to traditional
>>methods must offer real benefits that outweigh the cost/labor of transition.
>>In my opinion, learning two different software systems makes this cost too
>>great (not to mention the licensing costs!) for any benefit to justify it.
>>
>>Please let us know how we can participate in some form of community action
>>on this matter.
>>
>>David Lower
>>Emory ITD
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: insightl-bounces at mailman.yale.edu
>>[mailto:insightl-bounces at mailman.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Susan Jane Williams
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 9:21 AM
>>To: Stephen Paul Davis; insightl at mailman.yale.edu
>>Subject: Re: [Insightl] ArtSTOR interoperability
>>
>>I'm glad Stephen has raised this, and in such a cogent manner. I agree with
>>him about choices 2, 3, and 5. What we must not loose sight of, and what we
>>must remind both Luna and ARTStor about, is the user habits of those faculty
> >we serve _today_. Working in a digital environment will surely change work
>>habits and searching and discovery in the future, but for now many of us
>>encounter frustrated faculty who thought (mistakenly at this stage) that
>>working digitally was going to be faster and easier (no matter what we may
>>have told them up front). The primary goal for many of them is not
>>serendipitous discovery of something new, but a way to gather their
>>accustomed materials together and use in an easy interface. The moment any
>>scenario has them using more than one interface it becomes problematic. I do
>>think this will change and I do think as these systems mature, broader
>>searching and more adventurous use will be a benefit. However we must
>>satisfy what the faculty need and want (and are able to use) today, not what
>>we think they should want.
>>Cheers
>>Susan
>>
>>Susan Jane Williams
>>Cornell
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>> > Date: Mon Jul 26 15:42:23 EDT 2004
>> > From: "Stephen Paul Davis" <daviss at columbia.edu>
>> > Subject: [Insightl] ArtSTOR interoperability
>> > To: insightl at mailman.yale.edu
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Insight-Folks:
>> > My understanding from the folks at ArtSTOR is that they are currently
>> > trying to define what they might be able to 'expose' externally for
>> > metasearching and also what they might allow to be harvested for local
>> > use. Since these issues are clearly of interest to a number of
>> > potential Insight/ArtSTOR customers, including Columbia, I'm wondering if
>> > we couldn't start a bit of discussion here about what we would in fact
>> > want under those scenarios.
>> > I don't know how far others have already gone in terms of defining their
>> > requirements in this area or in direct discussions / negotiations with
>> > ArtSTOR about this. If some Insight customers have already
>> > made proposals along these lines, perhaps they would share with the
>> > list? In any event, let me take a quick stab to see if there's any
>> > consensus about what Insight customers' options and preferences might
>> > be.
>> > Here's a starter set of theoretically possible ArtSTOR access options for
>> > Luna Insight customers:
>> > 1) Local
>> > loading of both ArtSTOR images and metadata in local Insight
>> > systems
>> > 2) Local
>> > access to remote ArtSTOR-in-Insight collections via the Insight interface
>> > (as e.g., AMICO has been available)
>> > 3) Local
>> > access to locally or remotely-stored ArtSTOR-in-Insight metadata and
>> > thumbnail images (only), with the capability of linking directly from the
>> > thumbnail to the full-size version in the native ArtSTOR-in-ArtSTOR
>> > interface.
>> > 4)
>> > Metasearching by authorized institutions or service providers via
>> > software such as Metalib or Encompass for Resource
>> > Collections, using either HTTP, XML, or Z39.50
>> > 5)
>> > Harvesting of ArtSTOR metadata and thumbnails via OAI-PMH by authorized
>> > institutions or service providers (if feasible, using a metadata standard
>> > more appropriate to art images than Dublin Core), with the ability to
>> > link through directly to the images in the native ArtSTOR
>> > interface.
>> > ---
>> > These non-mutually-exclusive approaches would of course differ
>> > significantly in their difficulty complexity and in the level of
>> > service provided to end-users.
>> > I would venture that Columbia's and many others' preference would be #2,
>> > with #3 an acceptable alternative. In addition, we feel that #5 is
>> > also of great potential benefit given that there will always be image
>> > collections that are not going to be available via Insight and that at
>> > least some campuses (and perhaps other service providers
>> > organizations) will want to offer their communities as complete a
>> > discovery tool for images as possible.
>> > So, let's pretend you suddenly had enough money to subscribe to ArtSTOR
>> > or in fact have already scraped it together -- how would you prefer
>> > to access ArtSTOR's collections? Any other thoughts,
>> > suggestions?/Stephen
>> >
>> > ______________________________
>> > Stephen Paul
>> > Davis
>> >
>> > Director, Libraries Digital Program
> > > 207A Butler Library
>> > Columbia University
>> > 535 W. 114th Street
>> > New York, NY 10027
>> > email: daviss at columbia.edu
>> > phone: (212) 854-8584
>> > fax: (212) 854-0089
>> > ______________________________
>> >
>> >
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Insightl mailing list
>>Insightl at mailman.yale.edu
>>http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/insightl
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Insightl mailing list
>>Insightl at mailman.yale.edu
>>http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/insightl
>
>_______________________________________________
>Insightl mailing list
>Insightl at mailman.yale.edu
>http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/insightl
--
Dr. Dana Leibsohn
Associate Professor, Art Department
Director, Latin American and Latino/a Studies
Smith College, Brown Fine Arts Center
Northampton, MA 01063
413.585.3137 (phone)
413.585.3119 (fax)
More information about the Insightl
mailing list