Digitizing Images and Uploading them on Flickr
Here is the URL (I think) to my FlickR account. I will add more comments on the digitization process soon.
Flickr URL:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/42354457@N07/sets/72157622333487728/
Notes on the digitization:
I created this mini exhibit on the history of public transportation planning by Pittsburgh citizens in the early 1920s. I don’t have a car, and am often frustrated with public transport options, so I am always interested in learning about people's suggestions for improving public transport in the past. Usually, these suggestions never materialized. So, I found this report in the collections of the university library and scanned it based on the guidelines – master images scanned at 600 dpi. I used greyscale for the text images (much better than B&W photo) and color image for the diagrams. I then used photoshop and reduced the image size twice and created an image for the screen and an image for the thumbnail, and saved both as jpgs. I then uploaded it to Flickr and added tags and comments – it was the first time I created a Flickr account, so it was all new to me. I thought I was the first one to digitize the report, but as it always happens when you think you are the first, you are certainly not. I found out that the report had already been digitized as part of the Historic Pittsburgh Collections. So much for being the pioneer digitizer.
Some notes and problems: What struck me when creating the master image was how big the image is when you create a really good scan (it was exceeding 100 MB’s). This is a pretty big file, and so this is indicating the space problems on your hard drive or storage unit that you encounter if you make really high quality scans. And drive space costs money. So, with limited money and hard drive space, you can definitely not save everything.
I also had some problems with writing the tags for Flickr. Flickr always combined my key words into one big word, so it looks really strange, like: 60yearsbeforethesubwaytherewasaplan. Weird, isn’t it?
Also, I wasn’t sure if it is possible to actually arrange the thumbnails where they belong (at the first page of the exhibit in Flickr). Instead, all my thumbnails are showing up as part of the images that are part of the exhibit and Flickr is creating its own thumbnails. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Reading Notes
I was roughly familiar with the story of Linux, but it was interesting to read the story how it evolved as a spin-off from UNIX, and has been developed as an open source software ever since by a large group of programmers. It was also interesting that Linux programmers became more user friendly over time. I still find it difficult to understand, though. Can you just install it on a windows machine? I browsed through the Mac OSX/Linux article (I suppose we are not supposed to read these technical pieces line by line), and what struck me was Singh's critical, but dispassionate position toward windows as a client computer and his acknowledgement that most people use windows, not the least because it is cheaper than Mac. The update on the windows roadmap reads like a promotion piece – everything is moving forward, steadily improving, if you only trust microsoft!
Overall, the readings about the different operating systems highlight that compatibility is a huge problem – compatibility between older and newer operating systems, and also compatibility between mac and windows – I am not sure about Linux. It also creates a lot of practical problems if you work at a place that has both macs and pcs – at the archives where I used to work we often had to transfer multimedia files back and forth between windows and macs, which was not always easy.
Muddiest point
The lectures were all very clear; I don’t really have a muddy point. I am just generally wondering about the implications of the constant development and updates of hardware for libraries and archives – should libraries keep versions of old hardware models (f.e. 268 PCs with 5 ¼ inch floppy drives) so that they will be able to read files on old floppies that may contain important files and re-emerge one day?
Comments
I am a little unclear on this, but are we supposed to document where we have left comments?
I commented on Kristine Harveux-Lundeen's blog:
http://2600kristineharveaux-lundeen.blogspot.com/
And on Letisha Goerner's blog:
http://letishagoerner2600.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hi!
You raised some interesting points in the reading that I hadn't thought of. I had enjoyed the Windows XP article, based on the face that I understand that program over the other two. The Linux/Mac OSX are pretty foreign concepts to me (not being a mac user).
But what you wrote was true, the Windows article did sound like a promotion piece, but a good one at that. They did their job - that's for sure. Let's just hope, though, they can keep up with what they promised!
I'm going to answer your question - or try to. I've worked in libraries for some years and I know what you're talking about with old hardware that once was the norm to use. The library/archive I worked in had a vast digization program where they took VHS/Floppy Disks/8 Tracks and the like changing them copying the material to CDs or the computer themselves. This is a costly venture, but I do know that a lot of libraries are changing over to this new method of digitization.
Hi Katja,
I agree with you that you can't possibly digitize all materials, but it seems that many libraries are trying to do that. I know the issue with the floppy disks - I know at my university they were changing the floppys to cd-roms, they said that even though the price was hefty, that in the long run it was the cheapest option. I guess because so many machines and computers are no longer compatable with floppy hardware or external floopy drives.
At my library our director chose what he thought needed ditiization bases on content and importance. Since it was a political archive, tapes, VHS, and floppy disks were all changed over. Especially if they were a court hearing, news broadcast, or such.
Also, they were big on scanning photos and adding them as thumbnails to the website so people could have access. But they did keep hard copies of the same pictures. I believe they did dispose of all the tapes, VHS, etc.
I feel like they felt that ditization and storing everything on computers or on the internet was the best opinion. I don't think they were really thinking about long term, I believe they were hoping this was it really. That digitization will always be the best option.
Post a Comment