Juan Garces wrote:
> May I get back at my one suggestion: If (1) libraries generally do not make
> any money on imaging services and (2) there are many sub-publication quality
> images (from, e.g., microfiche, who are usually sufficient for transcription
> etc.) already in the hands of researchers who already paid for them, in
> theory it should be possible to approach libraries and ask whether we could
> make them available for easier access and use to a wider audience (free of
> charge). They would not loose any money, neither would we not make any money
> at their cost, since any further publication and reimaging in higher quality
> would still have to go via the IPR holders. Would anybody be interested in
> such a project?
I think it would be great, why not use existing services, like Flickr, and
simply agree a tagging scheme?
However, I don't think that the libraries would agree that they are not losing
any money. While it depends on the charging policy at individual institutions,
they may view it as a loss of income if no one is paying them for their
(existing, already taken at much greater cost) digital images. Sometimes
institutions use a flat pricing scheme of X amount per folio and when the image
has already been taken (or is easy to take) this subsidises the creation of new
images or those image which were more expensive to capture. (For example from
more delicate objects which require more time by the photographer.) In
addition, the income from image sales might also pay for the preservation of
existing images (server space, maintenance, etc.). I'm just playing devil's
advocate that this scheme might not receive a warm welcome at certain
institutions which have a lot invested in their own digitisation programmes.
(It will be more welcomed by small archives which are unable to afford to do
this themselves.)
> J
-J
--
Dr James Cummings, Oxford Text Archive, University of Oxford
James dot Cummings at oucs dot ox dot ac dot uk
Ask me about free long-term preservation for your electronic texts!
|