1. Dr Mike Pringle Director, AHDS Visual Arts The National Digital Image Initiative

2. Promoting good practice in the creation of visual arts digital resources for informed use in research and research-led teaching AHDS Visual Arts

6. Promoting good practice in the creation of visual arts digital resources for informed use in research and research-led teaching Providing rich, deep access to visual arts digital resources created by or for HE AHDS Visual Arts

9. Promoting good practice in the creation of visual arts digital resources for informed use in research and research-led teaching Providing rich, deep access to visual arts digital resources created by or for HE Preserving visual arts digital resources to ensure their long term survival and use AHDS Visual Arts

12. “The Digital Picture has been established to explore issues relating to the effects of the digital revolution on our use of images...” the Digital Picture

13. “…It will identify problems and develop practical solutions; liaise with stakeholders and interested parties; and offer guidance to teaching, learning and research communities.” the Digital Picture

14. United approach to a National issue All peer bodies; all arts institutes the Digital Picture

15. United approach to a National issue All peer bodies; all arts institutes Funded by the JISC AHDS Visual Arts – independence the Digital Picture

16. United approach to a National issue All peer bodies; all arts institutes Funded by the JISC AHDS Visual Arts – independence High profile the Digital Picture

17. United approach to a National issue All peer bodies; all arts institutes Funded by the JISC AHDS Visual Arts – independence High profile Foundation for understanding community needs the Digital Picture

18. National consultation of the affected community and all associated parties plus literature/peer project review Creation of a consortium to represent the community via seminars and online conferencing National Consultation

19. Establishment of working parties to discuss the specific issues relating to external interests (e.g. ARTstor and Bridgeman Art Library) Documentation of subsequent analysis and resultant recommendations National Consultation

20. Cost Image quality Metadata Standards Staff/financial resources Copyright and IPR Functionality Loss of arts resources. Physical environments Cultural change The Problems

21. Financial strains No money for digitization ICT money ring-fenced elsewhere Novelty factors Images often seen as non essential Cost

22. Display output Colour and contrast Clarity and depth of detail Scanning – unnecessary layer Enthusiastic amateurs… Image quality

23. Collections become unsearchable Images become unidentifiable All become unusable National/International standards Inbuilt technological facilities Institutional strategies Metadata standards

24. Insufficient time Insufficient training Need for commitment Software and hardware - in ICT department Resources

25. Blurred rights Conflict between promotion of digitization and safeguard of rights Legal challenges DACS and CLA Copyright and IPR

26. PowerPoint Dual projectors – compare and contrast Training Death by PowerPoint ARTstor - proprietary Functionality

27. Not all slides will be digitized Digital more stable than analogue? Slides/analogue pictures proven track record ZIP discs… Loss of resources

28. Projectors Compatibility – PC versus MAC Interactive classroom environments Physical environments

29. Cynicism Doubts Concern Cultural change

30. Cynicism Doubts Concern Outright terror! Cultural change

31. Bespoke method – appliance of science Plan, plan, plan Transparent definition of problems Structure and clarity Best result – least effort Method

32. UK-wide questionnaire Printed booklet and internet-based formats Extensive awareness programme: –CHEAD –ACADI –ADM Academy –ARLIS –etc. Clarification

33. UK-wide questionnaire Printed booklet and internet-based formats Extensive awareness programme Coordination of questionnaire results Interpretative analysis of qualitative data Clarification

34. Group/individual interviews Seminars and conferences Identifying stakeholders: –visual arts institutes –students and staff –funding/political organisations –commercial interests –copyright bodies etc. Clarification

35. Review of current research Overview of exemplar practice Examination of peer projects –Union Catalog for Art Images (UCAI) Clarification

36. Individuals and/or institutions championing specified proposals Presentations of ARTstor, Bridgeman Art Library etc. to working parties Series of expert seminars and online conferences to debate consultation results Evaluation

37. Publication of all conclusions Paper/s outlining recommendations and implications Evaluation

38. Finding a way forward…? Further funding Talks with lead bodies Implementation

39. Finding a way forward…? Further funding Talks with leading bodies National plan Implementation

40. The right images in the right format Legal issues sorted Usable structure Facilitates and manages loans Sharing/pooling of resources Common standards Safeguards and permissions Adequate support Plan for the UK

41. Your support Promotion Any questions? Any advice? Your views! Your part…?

43. National model – external National model – internal Local model Commercial image libraries National Fund Serendipity The Solutions

44. Identification of ‘corpus’ of images Setting up of a body Licensing agreement Shared software tools Searching and downloading EDINA and SCRAN National model - external

45. Pooling of resources Joining up of multiple institutes Interoperability Shared software tools Uploading or harvesting Searching and downloading Large and small National model - internal

46. Owned collections Material created for VLE/intranet Limited interest Politics/finances IPR… Local model

47. ARTstor Bridgeman Getty – EDINA Saskia Commercial licensing agreements Commercial image libraries

48. Dedicated money – NOF? Agreed agendas Local, small scale projects Nationally important, large scale projects Strategic overview National fund

49. Google… Serendipity

50. Google… IPR Metadata Quality Misinformation Etc., etc. Serendipity

51. Discuss the implications, both positive and negative, of each of the six potential models Note down several issues Create wish-list For this session

52. Discuss the implications, both positive and negative, of each of the six potential models Note down several issues Create wish-list Discuss results with rest of group For this session