From Essence to Assets. Making sense of an audiovisual archive
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•443 views
As presented on November 5, 2016 at the Impact Hub in Athens, Greece, as a part of the Audiovisual archiving workshop of the Interfaces Projects supported by the European Commission
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to From Essence to Assets. Making sense of an audiovisual archive
Similar to From Essence to Assets. Making sense of an audiovisual archive (20)
More from Brecht Declercq
More from Brecht Declercq (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
From Essence to Assets. Making sense of an audiovisual archive
- 1. From essence to assets Making sense of an audiovisual archive Brecht Declercq – Interfaces Project Workshop – Athens, Onassis Cultural Centre – 05.11.2016
- 3. 10.15 START 12.15 BREAK 12.25 BEN 14.00 LUNCH
- 4. 1. WHAT IS THE ROLE OF A DIGITAL AUDIOVISUAL ARCHIVE TODAY?
- 5. 1. WHAT IS THE ROLE OF A DIGITAL AUDIOVISUAL ARCHIVE TODAY?
- 6. Merely an illustration of history?
- 7. A proof of legitimacy?
- 8. A second hand product?
- 9. A source of inspiration?
- 10. Fertile grounds for new creations?
- 12. The living archive paradigm * ARCHIVE Professionals Creator-centered Quality Gate-keeping Taxonomy Contextualisation Interpretation Heritage Read-only memory DYNARCHIVE Crowd / users User-centered Popularity Participation Folksonomy Appropriation Consumption Nostalgia Write-also memory * Courtesy Pelle Snickars, Umea University
- 13. Smart, open, connected * * Courtesy J. Oomen, Nederlands Instituut voor Beeld en Geluid open Open licenses Open standards Open source software smart External development Micro services Automated metadata connected Linked to other data sources, collections and new target groups
- 14. Quick wins * Open: • Use open licenses for re-use • Prefer increased engagement over brand & volume control Smart: • Collaborate with a computer science university • Where can you use open source technology? • Only outsource what you understand Connected: • Go where your users are: syndication • Be convenient to digital – online – mobile use • Forge partnerships: content creators, scholars * Courtesy J. Oomen, Nederlands Instituut voor Beeld en Geluid
- 15. 3. FROM VALUE TO IMPACT
- 16. what is ... the value of an audiovisual archive?
- 17. T. Golodnoff & M. Lerkenfeld Smith use = value
- 18. Prof. S. Tanner, King’s College value = impact
- 19. value use impact = = in a public audiovisual archive the return on investment is the return on society as a whole
- 20. Which effects do GLAMs & broadcasters have? engagement enjoyment new experiences encouraging creativity self confidence changes in attitude understanding strengthening communities ...
- 21. Choose your target groups
- 22. Decisive factors in choosing target groups size of the group? intensivity of the impact? duration of the impact? frequency of the use? ... ?
- 23. Target group strategy get keep use
- 24. Common target groups of AVarchives
- 28. obvious target groupsscience & academia Larm.fm
- 30. * less obvious target groups refugees nedbox.be
- 31. nhk.or.jp/archives/kaisou * less obvious target groups dementia patients
- 32. * less obvious target groups tourists erfgoedinbeeld.nl
- 33. 4. HOW DO YOU BRING THIS INTO PRACTICE?
- 35. content essence metadata Technical Descriptive Administrative content = essence + metadata
- 36. Digitisation & digital preservation
- 37. Digitisation: why? (1) Picture top left: The Great Bear Analogue & Digital Media
- 39. courtesy Chris Lacinak, AVPreserve Digitisation: urgency
- 40. 8 digitization projects Ca. 357.600 AV carriers Ca. 270.000 pages 18 carrier types 95+ content partners 8 digi’n service providers Digitisation projects at VIAA
- 41. 1. PROJECT DEFINITION 2. PROJECT PLAN 4. REGISTRATION 3. TENDERING 5. DETAILING 6. TEST PHASE 7. PILOT PHASE 9. EVALUATION 8. PRODUCTION PHASE Typical digitisation project timeline
- 44. Digitisation: output formats & codecs
- 45. Digitisation: checks at ingest
- 47. Media asset management systems
- 48. Digital preservation “a formal endeavor to ensure that digital information of continuing value remains accessible and usable.”
- 49. Digital preservation: definition Ensure access to and use of authentic reformated and born digital content, regardless of media failure and changes in technology. Emanates in: • Policies • Strategies • Actions
- 50. Digital preservation: in practice Appraisal: o File format and codec sustainability o Characterisation File identification: o Unique referencing o File naming protocols o Connection to external metadata Integrity o Recorded as intended o Staying the same (sustainable) Fixity o Unaltered information Sustainability o Codecs and containers: preservation watch o Physical media obsolescence
- 52. content essence metadata Technical Descriptive Administrative content = essence + metadata
- 53. A theoretical framework for developing strategies for the creation and use of (descriptive) metadata Metadata: the Hourglass Model
- 54. Linked data User generated metadata Automatically extracted metadata Preservation metadata Descriptive metadata etc ... Production metadata Linked metadata
- 63. Recent developments: Further integration with production systems New approaches: e.g. scan & OCR tape boxes (1) Metadata from production
- 64. - collaboration of producers often needed! almost only for contemporary born digital content + cheap high quality quick high level of detail (1) Metadata from production
- 65. Recent developments: Diversification: from low tech to high tech New approaches: consumer generated metadata from ‘conscious’ to ‘unconscious’ metadata (2) User generated metadata
- 68. ARCHIVEBROADCAST TARGET GROUP EDUCATION TARGET GROUP RESEARCH TARGET GROUP GENERAL AUDIENCE MEDIA VALUE CHAIN: METADATA FLOW FROM USER GENERATED METADATA TO CONSUMER GENERATED METADATA FIRST PURPOSE RE-PURPOSEARCHIVE BROADCASTER BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE ARCHIVE BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
- 69. - reliability? IPR issues labour intensity - net gains? subjective sustainable? + very cheap high quality public involvement with your collection! (2) User generated metadata
- 70. Recent developments: Ever more cases in daily practice (3) Automatically extracted metadata
- 71. Recent developments: New approaches: SaaS (3) Automatically extracted metadata
- 72. - high tech quality? interface? system architecture integration? + cheap quick high level of detail objective (3) Automatically extracted metadata
- 73. New strategies for metadata in AVarchives
- 74. CREATION LEVEL PROCESSING LEVEL PURPOSE LEVEL FULL MANUAL METADATA PRESERVATION & COLLECTION MANAGEMENT SEARCH & RETRIEVAL MAM Evolutions: starting point
- 75. CREATION LEVEL PROCESSING LEVEL PURPOSE LEVEL FULL MANUAL METADATA PRESERVATION & COLLECTION MANAGEMENT SEARCH & RETRIEVAL PRODUCTION METADATA MAM Evolutions: 1st generation MAMs
- 77. Institutionally: new relations with the world outside Organisationally: new roles, structures, competencies Technically: new systems, new architectures organisational institutional Technical Implementing a metadata strategy
- 78. Institutional MORE OPENNESS AT THE INPUT, E.G. USER AS METADATA CREATOR MORE OPENNESS AT OUTPUT: E.G. LINKING COLLECTIONS, (OPEN) API’S
- 79. Organisational NEW TECHNICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL POSSIBILITIES NEW USERS / TARGET GROUPSNEW NEEDS / DEMANDS DECISIONMAKING PROCESSMANAGEMENT QUALITYCHECKING RECOGNIZE&CONNECT METADATAMANAGER
- 80. Technical MAMs AND ESB’S ARE NOT DEAD
- 81. SOLID STANDARDS, FLEXIBLE CONNECTIONS GRADUAL SYSTEM ADAPTATIONS RAPIDLY EVOLVING TECHNOLOGY EVER MORE EXTERNAL CONNECTIONS Technical
- 82. (c) content essence metadata Technical Descriptive Administrative from content to asset “the essence, the metadata and the right to use them”
Editor's Notes
- I’ll try to inspire you, buy illustrating my story with the examples of lots of institutions managing big collections. But first of all... Can I ask you what your answer could be on this question? “Youtube has become the standard of what people expect audiovisual archives to be. Unlimited access and active user participation have become crucial for an archive’s visibility and public existence.”
- Interaction: we provide access to the audiovisual heritage for four main target groups: the educational world, researchers, the general public through public libraries and our content partners themselves of course. They can always keep the same rights to access their materials as before their collaboration with VIAA.
- A lot of local initiatives – hold their own archive As many of you have an ideal situation where the archive is in the basement, our physical carriers are scattered amongst the country.
- Now, what is my point of showing you these pictures? It is to stress the urgency of this matter. If we want to save our heritage we need a solution, and we need it fast. This is a quote of Mike Casey of Indiana University, one of the largest audiovisual archives in the US. He said this in 2013.
- CURRENTLY GOING ON:
- TYPICAL TIMELINE OF A PROJECT:
- The workflow: inventories – registration – packaging and transport – digitization – return the carriers – store the files (for each: whom, with which tools). It should be noted that VIAA is not responsible for the long term analog preservation, that stays the responsibility of the content partners, only for the integrity of the objects during the transport and digitization.
- DIGITIZATION: SMPTE logo invullen
- STORAGE
- THE MAM
- But we have to deal with metadata coming directly from production nowadays...
- Born out of the need for structure and overview
- So what I’d like to do, is to offer a model... In which someone sometime recognized an Hourglass. With a creation level. A purpose level. And a processing level in between the two.
- And now we can start to fill in this model. First on the creation level: let’s fill in the four big categories in which metadata are created these days. And then let’s go down. And fill in all the goals these metadata are serving.
- And then it’s up to the archivist to make some decisions, right? Cause this one is very classic: manually describing the content for the users to find it. And who doesn’t use metadata from production to manage the collection. But just think about this one: using user generated metadata... For digital preservation... E.g.: can labor intensive quality control of digitization some day be done ... by users? Or can automatically generated metadata be used as the basis for enhancement and contextualisation, for example by transforming it into linked data? The conclusion is, that if you start to make combinations, old ways of thinking still fit in, while new possibilities arise.
- But let’s take this just one step further... Because we can also make multi-combinations. Indeed, several sources can be used to serve one or more purposes. Of course, it’s up to the archivist then to manage the process, and to control the quality of it.
- Or additions: The first one is very classic in a broadcast archive: Metadata coming from production are corrected, updated, extended, ... manually by catalogers, to enable preservation and collection management. This one is a little more adventurous I would say: Automatically generated metadata are corrected by users to enable search and retrieval.
- In the end the Hourglass should allow the cataloging department: To change your screwdriver... (being manual annotation only) That multipurpose goody that you used to use also as a hammer sometimes, or as a knife...
- For a whole fancy toolbox. Of well suited tools... For particular circumstances.
- Diversification: Both examples about birds tweeting! Twitter Vroege vogels
- User generated metadata = user is actively creating metadata and mostly aware of him being a metadata source. Consumer generated metadata = metadata creation is a by-product of media consumption (in first purpose or in re-purpose), the consumer is mostly unaware of him being a metadata source. In fact the right question for an archivist should be : “which data surround our archive?” How can they serve our purposes, how can we capture them?
- So what I’d like to do, is to offer a model... In which someone sometime recognized an Hourglass. With a creation level. A purpose level. And a processing level in between the two.
- So what I’d like to do, is to offer a model... In which someone sometime recognized an Hourglass. With a creation level. A purpose level. And a processing level in between the two.
- And now we can start to fill in this model. First on the creation level: let’s fill in the four big categories in which metadata are created these days. And then let’s go down. And fill in all the goals these metadata are serving.
- Recognize: virtually all data around the archive can be considered metadata. Ask not: “how can we create metadata?” Ask: “where are the data? how can we turn them into metadata?”
- MAMs and ESB’s are not dead, they’re just changing.
- This is what you technically have to be prepared for, if you want to implement the hourglass model