Skip to main content

The Workload Iceberg for Digital Collections and Initiatives

In the last few weeks, I was asked to write a small paragraph explaining my area to others in the library.  I was happy to do this, as many people say they don’t know what my people do.  It’s sometimes hard to explain to others what we do without going into overtly technical topics and terms.  If we have done our job right, we’re practically invisible, which is the way it should be.  Anyway, writing the description made me realize why there is often a mis-match between what we do and what people think we do.  I’ll let you read the description yourself.  I’ve underlined the important bit.

“Digital Resources is primarily an Open Access publisher.  We publish both born digital items (produced by students or faculty), and we scan to publish or republish old items. We curate digital collections through the whole digital life-cycle. Our work is a bit different from other departments because the more work we finish; the more work we create in having to maintain the collections. We’re not just “putting stuff up;” we are organizing it, assessing it, enhancing it, and preserving it for future access.  The unit also supports digital scholarship in the university by consulting on external faculty projects using our experience with metadata, digital preservation, and our technical infrastructure and knowledge. The addition of the web librarian to the unit is a natural fit since curating the website is much like curating a digital collection with many of the same challenges and technology. The whole unit is preparing to get more experience with open source digital library software to start creating digital exhibits, working with linked data, and providing more support for digital scholarship on campus.”

So I realized, when my unit first started we were mostly about putting stuff up.  At the time, 90% of our efforts were about publishing and about 10% was about management.  As we developed more and more content, that percentage started to shift. We ended up spending about half our time putting up items and half the time curating what we had already put up.  Now, that has shifted to 80% curation, with only 20% new items.  We’re shifting off some of the curation responsibilities to other groups, but it still stands that most of our work is dealing with what we already have up.  This means fixing metadata, organizing collections, preserving collections, auditing the ETD collection etc.   This, compared to our public facing librarians who never really develop any kind of legacy work, or even the systems office who are technical librarians but don’t have to curate everything they touch.


This makes us a bit different, and maybe is an opportunity to talk about the iceberg that is digital collections and digital initiatives.  The collections themselves are only the tip of the iceberg. Curation is the rest of it.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Atiz scanner and Kirtas scanner aren’t playing nice with eachother

I love the Atiz scanner for it's simplicity, good design, and utility. I love the Kirtas scanners for their speed and their "wow" factor when people see the things work. The only problem I have at the moment is taking our current Kirtas workflow (using Kirtas's software Bookscan Editor, Superbatch, and OCR manager), and finding a way to make the Atiz scanner workflow work with it. The Atiz machine came with a hefty batch editing program that does a great job of cleaning up the images and making them wonderfully presentable. The machine even came with a PDF maker, but it doesn't OCR on its own, and it doesn't give you the options that Kirtas' OCR manager do. So, I want to process the Atiz scanner finished images using Kirtas’s OCR manager. However, that seems to be more difficult than I had first expected. For the next month, I’ll be trying to figure out how to make this marriage of Atiz and Kirtas systems work. If it ends up failing, then I may have t...
4 comments
Read more

Ex Libris Digital Preservation system

Today I attended a webinar from Sun Microsystems about the new Ex Libris Digital Preservation system. You can view the webinar here . The talking points are they handle all the hardware and they can handle the software. They claim it’s secure and built with redundancy. The major problem is that they say you can’t provide access to the files without getting Primo (Ex Libris’s new Amazon-like catalog toy-which is looking fun). They won’t convert the files for you when the formats out of style, but they make it so that you can maintain and upgrade the files. All and all, I like the idea of a comprehensive digital preservation system being handled by people who know hardware. I Just think it is going to be too expensive for most libraries. Time will tell how many libraries pick this up.
5 comments
Read more

Microfilm and Microfiche scanners

I have been researching high speed microfiche and microfilm scanners for the last year. There are four major companies that produce microform scanners. Mekel (a Crowley Company), Wicks and Wilson , nextScan ,and Sunrise . They each have their advantages and disadvantages. Both nextScan and Sunrise have 3-in-1 or 2-in-1 models, where you have one machine (~$100,000) that comes with one attachment, and you buy other attachments for different types of microform (Microfilm, Microfiche, and Aperture card). Each attachment costs extra. I never figured out the cost for the attachments. nextScan also has a dedicated roll film scanner , that I’ve heard good reviews from the Newspaper Digitization Project in Australia . In general, I have heard that the 3-in-1 or 2-in-1 machines are fine, but they tend to go slower than dedicated machines. They really are built for versatility and marketed toward libraries who can only afford one machine that can do all types (Paying $100,000+ for one...
4 comments
Read more