Digitising Everything

It's interesting to read about the Smithsonian's plan to digitise their entire collections. One of the classic questions for memory institutions is whether to digitise whole segments of the collection (or even the entire thing) or to cherry-pick items to fit with particular themes.

I've seen both types of projects - yes, of course, some parts of collection based digitisation projects are not as interesting as others but the very nature of their presence in the collection means that they are an important element (if not a shining light, perhaps a supporting player). Overly selective projects can suffer from decontextualisation, resulting in a very pretty exhibition which doesn't fulfil longer term preservation and access goals.

Of course, the classic problem with selection is that huge emphasis is placed on the selection process. A digitisation programme can live or die based on the objects chosen as well as the way they've been presented. The Smithsonian's approach is deliberately aimed at avoiding this problem - they making everything accessible in an attempt to better engage with the talents which exist in the digital creative sector (and through these, school students).

This is a really bold move and it'll be exciting to see how things progress. As I'm sure they're keenly aware this kind of strategic approach requires a commitment to digitise everything that enters the collections from now on. Those whose job it is to prioritise (and, no doubt, seek funding for) the objects will constantly be weighing up the benefits of digitising the existing collections or the new, and exciting, things that have just been purchased.

Microsoft Surface

Engadget has reported that Sheraton Hotels have started to install a few Microsoft Surface stations in their hotels. I think these are one of the coolest things ever for libraries. The Object Recognition element should be fantastic for anyone with digital content which can be used to enhance physical material.

Forget the capacity for actually accessing, flipping pages and interacting with digital content for the moment (although this does take the 'Turning the Pages' idea to a whole new level). Instead I can see the system recognising ISBN'd material lain on top of it from the barcode and unique material from the (equally unique) back surfaces.

From there you can see how interpretive data created by libraries and user comments can be lain around the surface, with the physical item linked to all kinds of complementary digital content - whether it be "See also..." type information, biographies or user reviews. In addition, library services can be marketed by laying them out next to relevant material.

There's not much information on how cultural organisations might use this kind of technology - Microsoft seems to be pitching this at Bars and, obviously, Hotels. It's a shame because I can honestly see museums loving this as a concept - and libraries should too.

Injecting some GLAMour into libraries

I've just come back from the 2008 Society of Archivists' Conference in York¹ and it's made me think yet again about how artificial the boundary between cultural institutions has become.

I've spoken at the annual SOA event a few times and each time I've taken pains to say that I work in "a library, an archive, a museum and more..." to reflect the quantity and diversity of our collections.

As someone who came from outside the sector I have sometimes had difficulty differentiating between the archival and library functions (the best description I've heard thus far has been that a big library is "at the same time an artisan chocolatier and a high-volume sausage factory"!). Highly skilled staff can delicately tease the key themes and structures from a seemingly incomprehensible array of personal papers and diaries whilst others can pull in hundreds of catalogue records for legal deposit material through z39.50.

The role of Museums, Libraries and Archives seems to be merging ever closer - we already have some convergence at the policy level (at least in Wales and England) - and it's getting harder to determine collection policies as data stubbornly refuses to fit into our existing boxes.

Lorcan Dempsey adds Galleries to the list and calls them 'GLAM', which I have to say has a nice ring to it. In many ways we're all trying to be a bit more GLAMorous; improving access to our material and attracting the public to our resources, whether online or in person.

Convergence is, however, not the same as unity. We can learn from each other as organisations - that much is clear - but there are still some fundamental differences in terms of training, perspective and operation. True, archives are showing off their unique collections, libraries are leaning more towards interpretation and everyone is engaging with the visual medium of the web but there's still life in the old constructs yet.

As an example, Librarians view everything on the web as published, but a large proportion of this is unique material which fits into our traditional view of archival material - either way a lot of it is ephemeral. In the digital age we can all have a copy, so this shouldn't be a problem (remember, LOCKSS is a philosophy, not just software!) but we can't really afford to duplicate effort so the problem remains.

The challenge for those of us working in GLAMorous organisations is to find out what terms and activities best link in to the public psyche in an age of Google Books, self-archiving, free museums and Who Do You Think You Are? without compromising our core values as cultural organisations.


¹ By the way, the irony of the all the SOA conference information disappearing from the website on the last day of the event isn't lost on me. This is a prime example of how a CMS can be anti-informational.