JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for LIS-ELIB Archives


LIS-ELIB Archives

LIS-ELIB Archives


LIS-ELIB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LIS-ELIB Home

LIS-ELIB Home

LIS-ELIB  September 1999

LIS-ELIB September 1999

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

New Report: Description and Indexing of Images

From:

Catherine Grout <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 24 Sep 1999 14:34:50 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (152 lines)

I am pleased to announce the presence of the following report which
should be of interest to list members

Best Wishes

Catherine
---------------------------------------------

Graham, Margaret E.  Description and indexing of images: report of a
survey of ARLIS members, 1998/99.  Institute for Image Data Research,
University of Northumbria at Newcastle, 1999.

This report presents the findings of a survey of UK art and picture
libraries into the description and indexing of images, carried out
within the Institute for Image Data Research, University of
Northumbria at Newcastle, in the period November 1998 to January 1999.
The report covers background information on the context of the survey;
the methodology adopted; presentation and discussion of the findings;
and, a summary and conclusions.

In the Autumn of 1998, the Institute for Image Data Research was
commissioned by the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the
Higher Education Funding Councils to prepare a state of the art report
on Content-Based Image Retrieval (URL:
http://www.unn.ac.uk/iidr/CBIR/cbir.html) , with particular emphasis
on the capabilities and limitations of current technology, and the
extent to which it is likely to prove of practical use to users in
higher education and elsewhere. The ARLIS Survey was carried out in
order to inform a section of the report to do with current techniques
for image and video retrieval.  It also gave the researchers the
opportunity to find out what were some of the issues to do with the
management of image collections and current cataloguing and indexing
practices.

The questionnaire was distributed in early November 1998 to 181
institutional members of the Art Libraries Society of the UK.  By
January 1999, sixty-one completed questionnaires had been returned
representing fifty-eight organisations.

A summary of the findings is as follows:

Survey respondents:
The majority of the respondents (60%) were from academic institutions,
representing the further and higher education community.

Image collections maintained:
The image collections maintained by respondents included the following
types: slides (35 mm); video; photographs (positives); photographs
(negatives); posters; prints; paintings; drawings; transparencies (5"x
4"); fabrics; film; art reproductions; illustrations/cuttings; and
lantern slides.  The most popular combination of types in any
collection was '35 mm slides' and 'videos'.

The extent of digitisation is low, with just under a quarter of
respondents (23%) reporting that they had digitised some or, in one
case, all of their image collections.  Some had grants to undertake
partial digitisation and one or two were about to start a digitisation
project.

Cataloguing and indexing practices:
Three quarters of the respondents formally described their images,
although the level of description varied considerably across
organisations and sometimes between types of material within the one
organisation.  Artist/photographer, Title and Date were the most
popular descriptors.

For each type of image, with the exception of video, the majority of
respondents used in-house rules to describe their images, although
several indicated that practice varied between different types of
image.  In the case of videos, the majority used the Anglo-American
Cataloguing Rules.  Specific tools for describing non-text items, such
as the standards developed by the Museum Documentation Association and
the Visual Resources Association, were in use by a small number.

There was a wide variation in the way images were described in terms
of their content, e.g. subject, period, genre, etc.  In most cases,
Title was ranked highest alongside Subject headings.

The majority of respondents used in-house schemes to classify and
index their images.  The Dewey Decimal Classification was the most
popular classification scheme in use, particularly for videos.
Specialist schemes such as Social History and Industrial
Classification, the Art and Architecture Thesaurus, Thesaurus of
Graphic Materials, and ICONCLASS, were in use by a small number of
respondents.

Two thirds of the respondents maintained catalogues and indexes for
some or all of their image collections.  The most popular type were
manual indexes and catalogues, followed by online catalogues and
database management systems.  Only a small proportion used image
management systems.

Issues to do with indexing images:
Just over half the respondents (52%) were not satisfied with the
content indexing of their image collections, whilst 42% indicated that
they were satisfied.  Of the former, 55% indicated that more in-depth
indexing was required or that not enough subject terms or keywords
were assigned.

The three most important problems or issues that arose when
cataloguing and indexing images were: aspects of the indexing process
itself; resources (i.e. time, money or people); and, the indexing
tools available (or, sometimes, the lack of an appropriate tool).

Issues to do with searching for images:
The three most important problems or issues which users experience
when searching and retrieving images were: the indexing policies or
practices in the institutions concerned; aspects of users' information
seeking behaviour; and, the type of index available and how this
affected the way users searched and retrieved images.

Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR):
On the whole, more respondents thought that CBIR techniques would be
of some use to the users of their image collections than thought they
would be of no use, although there was some variation across types of
image.  However, several respondents indicated that they were not
sure, or did not know, if CBIR would be of use to their users.
Retrieval by colour and shape were considered more useful than
retrieval by texture.

Uses of images:
The three most popular uses of images were:  supporting lectures,
seminars and teaching; private study and research; and publications.
________________________________

The report is available at: http://www.unn.ac.uk/iidr/ARLIS/

Printed versions of the report are available from the author.

Margaret Graham
Research and Development Manager
Institute for Image Data Research
University of Northumbria at Newcastle
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 8ST

Tel:  0191 227 4646
Fax:  0191 227 4637
Email:  [log in to unmask]
--
*Catherine Grout*Visual Arts Data Service Project Manager*
**Surrey Institute of Art & Design**Farnham**Surrey**
****URL: http://vads.ahds.ac.uk *tel: 01252 892723****

Providing, preserving and promoting . . .
high quality digital resources for the visual arts




%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
January 2024
December 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
February 2022
December 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
May 2021
September 2020
October 2019
March 2019
February 2019
August 2018
February 2018
December 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
June 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
November 2016
August 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
September 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager