1. University of St Andrews Image Database Dr Birgit Plietzsch bp10@st-andrews.ac.uk Visual Resource Association Conference Toronto, March 2009

2. Background user requests from across the Faculty of Arts academic need for multiple implementations? future support needs of a number of similar technical implementations? University of St Andrews, IT Services

3. Interests University of St Andrews, IT Services The University IT Services Academics Accessibility legislation Management of electronic data Use of institutional authentication technical expertise of academics multiple standards and database schemas IT Helpdesk approached re content development problems authentication mechanisms future support needs of a number of similar technical solutions Ownership my images my database Restrictions on sharing content within the same school? within the University? with the rest of the world?

4. Scenario 1: CDs / DVDs Cheap to produce No record keeping of existing images Finding right image can be time consuming Collaboration: –sharing storage media –easy to lose part of the image collection No integration with other image collections University of St Andrews, IT Services

5. Scenario 2: Databases Differences in: –the use of software –database structures –metadata and controlled vocabularies no integration of various image collections support and maintenance dependent on academic staff who may leave the University University of St Andrews, IT Services

6. Scenario 3: A central database Costs arise once (development, s/w, h/w) Central database: –easier to support –encourages collaboration –consistent record keeping ITS deal with technical aspects Schools deal with content University of St Andrews, IT Services

7. Existing software v project needs Repository software MDID Luna Insight among others University of St Andrews, IT Services technologies required implementation of accepted standards collection creation use of institutional authentication mechanism recurrent Helpdesk issues

8. Recommended standards VRA Core 4.0 & CCO Challenges: –vagueness and complexity –standards not written alongside one another –Complexity: beyond most academics who want to set up an image collection –Subject-specific image description –Controlled vocabularies: Use of controlled vocabularies Consistent use across different collections –Ambiguities in the VRA standard (e.g. the handling of dates) University of St Andrews, IT Services

9. c. 1927 1922 1932 c. 1927 1922 1932 c. 1927 1927 Date is +/- 5 years

10. Solutions Not all issues have been resolved on the technical level. –controlled vocabularies templating system to address some of the complexity, e.g: –AGENT: photograph: photographer painting: painter architecture: architect Etc use of high-resolution images to address content development issues University of St Andrews, IT Services

11. Image Database http://imagedatabase.st-andrews.ac.uk University of St Andrews, IT Services

12. Public welcome screen

13. A Corpus of Scottish Medieval Parish Churches project image collection

18. Collection-specific data input template

19. Lightbox

20. Slideshow

22. Thanks Technical implementation & maintenance: –Sean Dooley –Swithun Crowe Advice: –Mick Eadie (Visual Arts Data Service) –colleagues in ITS, academic Schools, University Library –vra-l Permission to demonstrate project: –Prof. Richard Fawcett (School of Art History), A Corpus of Scottish Medieval Parish Churches Project: http://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/corpusofscottishchurches http://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/corpusofscottishchurches … among others University of St Andrews, IT Services

23. University of St Andrews Image Database Dr Birgit Plietzsch bp10@st-andrews.ac.uk Visual Resource Association Conference Toronto, March 2009