62 · Survey Results: Survey Questions and Responses
Bridgeman, Davis, etc., and scanned images from print or other materials) are funded and supported by the UW Bothell
Library (in the UW Libraries system), the School of Art, and the College of Built Environments.
Digital Library processes and policies are in the process of becoming more integrated into other library departments.
It’s difficult to know the larger image environment on campus. We know that other projects are happening and we hear
of other repositories on campus, but building a 1-stop source for all campus images eludes us. Other entities on campus
seem determined to go it alone. Increasingly our faculty undertake image searching, retrieval, and production on their
own.
Map Collection manages their own digital image collections in terms of acquisition and access with technical support
from DNS. Archives is a hybrid. Commercial image systems/collections are handled by selectors, Acquisitions Unit,
Serials Unit, Electronic Resources Librarian in varying degrees. Each area/subject department can, and sometimes does,
create their own digital image collections or databases and mount them on personal, campus, or commercial systems
without consulting or working with DNS. The Preservation unit listed this priority “Develop Library policy for preserving
and managing digital resources” in their 2000 collection development statement, but that unit is not officially charged
to work with digital image collections. An “Electronic Collections Committee” last met in early 2006. The Electronic
Resources Librarian serves on the library Collection Development and Management Committee (CDMC) but to my
knowledge there is no separate electronic resources collection development/management statement.
New policy on digitization projects will affect our developments in this area.
Our currently available locally digitized collections can be found at http://digitalcollections.mcmaster.ca/. Six digital
collections (including both images and textual materials) sourced from our collections are available via Gale Cengage’s
Archives Unbound platform. We were also contributors to Adam Matthew’s “First World War: Personal Experiences”
collection.
Our Digital Collections department is part of the Libraries Systems department, but coordinates the digitization with the
curators of the special collection libraries on campus. The acquisition of licensed content for users is decided within the
main library’s general collections staff on campus and not in systems.
Our digital image collections are for the most part not treated separately from our other commercial databases and our
other digital assets.
RE: collection development, the most important thing is content. All else is secondary.
Responses are based on in-house special collections content and in-house production, mounted in a content
management system.
Some scattered thoughts: In my library, we have prioritized the creation of digital images, but not the acquisition of
licensed digital image resources nor services focused on digital images (locally created or licensed). Creation/acquisition,
use, and management of digital images is so integrated with other types of collections and services that it is quite
difficult to pull this apart and speak exclusively about digital image collections and services. Furthermore, for better or
worse, there are very different practices and services, and completely different staff involved with managing licensed vs.
locally created digital collections. So the questions in this survey that coupled “digital image databases/resources” were
difficult to answer accurately.
The authors might want to consult with visual resources curators they have been dealing with these issues since the
early 1990s. Check the Visual Resources Association web site.
Bridgeman, Davis, etc., and scanned images from print or other materials) are funded and supported by the UW Bothell
Library (in the UW Libraries system), the School of Art, and the College of Built Environments.
Digital Library processes and policies are in the process of becoming more integrated into other library departments.
It’s difficult to know the larger image environment on campus. We know that other projects are happening and we hear
of other repositories on campus, but building a 1-stop source for all campus images eludes us. Other entities on campus
seem determined to go it alone. Increasingly our faculty undertake image searching, retrieval, and production on their
own.
Map Collection manages their own digital image collections in terms of acquisition and access with technical support
from DNS. Archives is a hybrid. Commercial image systems/collections are handled by selectors, Acquisitions Unit,
Serials Unit, Electronic Resources Librarian in varying degrees. Each area/subject department can, and sometimes does,
create their own digital image collections or databases and mount them on personal, campus, or commercial systems
without consulting or working with DNS. The Preservation unit listed this priority “Develop Library policy for preserving
and managing digital resources” in their 2000 collection development statement, but that unit is not officially charged
to work with digital image collections. An “Electronic Collections Committee” last met in early 2006. The Electronic
Resources Librarian serves on the library Collection Development and Management Committee (CDMC) but to my
knowledge there is no separate electronic resources collection development/management statement.
New policy on digitization projects will affect our developments in this area.
Our currently available locally digitized collections can be found at http://digitalcollections.mcmaster.ca/. Six digital
collections (including both images and textual materials) sourced from our collections are available via Gale Cengage’s
Archives Unbound platform. We were also contributors to Adam Matthew’s “First World War: Personal Experiences”
collection.
Our Digital Collections department is part of the Libraries Systems department, but coordinates the digitization with the
curators of the special collection libraries on campus. The acquisition of licensed content for users is decided within the
main library’s general collections staff on campus and not in systems.
Our digital image collections are for the most part not treated separately from our other commercial databases and our
other digital assets.
RE: collection development, the most important thing is content. All else is secondary.
Responses are based on in-house special collections content and in-house production, mounted in a content
management system.
Some scattered thoughts: In my library, we have prioritized the creation of digital images, but not the acquisition of
licensed digital image resources nor services focused on digital images (locally created or licensed). Creation/acquisition,
use, and management of digital images is so integrated with other types of collections and services that it is quite
difficult to pull this apart and speak exclusively about digital image collections and services. Furthermore, for better or
worse, there are very different practices and services, and completely different staff involved with managing licensed vs.
locally created digital collections. So the questions in this survey that coupled “digital image databases/resources” were
difficult to answer accurately.
The authors might want to consult with visual resources curators they have been dealing with these issues since the
early 1990s. Check the Visual Resources Association web site.