Share or sharealike – deciding how, when and where to share your digital content
32
Share and Sharealike – The How and Why of Sharing Collections Online Nick Poole, CEO, Collections Trust (@NickPoole1)
-
Upload
museums-computer-group -
Category
Documents
-
view
1.094 -
download
0
description
Presentation given at UKMW12, the Museums Computer Group's Museums on the Web 'Strategically Digital' conference, Wellcome Collection, London, November 30, 2012
Transcript of Share or sharealike – deciding how, when and where to share your digital content
Share and Sharealike – The How and Why of Sharing Collections Online
Nick Poole, CEO, Collections Trust (@NickPoole1)
The presentation…
That became a research project…
That became a book…
“There are many different ways of opening up collections online for access and engagement. Each one costs my museum something.
How do I decide which ones to go with?”
Initial question:
Access ≠ value
Open access ≠ fewer sales
Commercial ≠ profit-making
Content ≠ metadata
‘Digital’ ≠ an audience
Let’s start with:
- Audience
- Culture
- Mission
So what are the options?
The continuum of use…
CONTENT
METADATA
A BIT A LOT
FUN
RESEARCH
LEARNING
DATA MININGCOLLECTIONS
MANAGEMENT
AGGREGATION
OUTREACH
Content-based experiences…
Your own…
3rd party…
Metadata-based promotional/finding tools…
Your own…
3rd party…
• Achieving your cultural mission and/or objectives• Delivering on your public task• Enhancing the status of your museum or gallery• Raising the public profile of the organisation• Establishing new revenue streams• Increased revenue from existing image licensing/commercial activity• Improved balance of commercial revenue against grant-in-aid or other support• Access to new funding streams (such as European funding programmes)• Advocating the importance of collections as a key part of service delivery• Improved case for collections management and/or documentation• Opening up tasks for collaboration and crowdsourcing• Improving the quality and consistency of your collections information
Return on Investment
Effort: 4
Upside: Exposure through GoogleUser-focussed tools for digital curationPromotes re-use of your existing images
Downsides: Not focused on sending people/value back to youGoogle is a businessOnly takes content around selected themes
Return on Investment: Reputational Levels of usage not known
http://g-cultural-institute.appspot.com/signup
Google Cultural Institute
Effort: 6
Upside: Exposure through GoogleGorgeous gigapixel images
Downsides: Very selective focusGoogle is a businessIt’s a ‘walled garden’Gigapixel images
Return on Investment: Reputational 20m visitors in first 12 months200k user-created ‘collections’
Google Art Project
Effort: 5
Upside: Huge potential audienceFits with the cultural missionPromoting open re-use
Downsides: Huge potential audienceRequires CC0Irrevocable
Return on Investment: CulturalAudience
Wikimedia Commons
Effort: 4
Upside: MoneyExposureEnhanced metadata
Downsides: Very selectiveOut of your handsRetain 25-50% of the licensing fees
Return on Investment: FinancialDepends on the collection500 high-profile works – c. £5k - £12k per annum2000 mid-range works – c. £5k - £30k per annum
Commercial Picture Libraries
Effort: 10
Upside: MoneyPoliticsAccess to images
Downsides: High upfront costsHigh staff/running costs
Return on Investment: OrganisationalPicture library revenue supports further digitisationPicture library activities support other functions
V&A Images revenue for 2008-9 was projected at £350,000 (20k images), of which 62% was estimated to come from commercial image licensing….
Your Own Picture Library
Effort: 7
Upside: Exposure - huge demand for UK contentPolitical/reputational valueAccess to future European fundingAccess to apps, labs, network, expertise
Downsides: Won’t take data directly from your museumYour data is presented alongside everyone else’sYour metadata in their data model
Return on Investment: Audience6m searches on Europeana this year (23m records)Potential access to future EU digitisation funding
Europeana
Effort: 4
Upside: Share it once, deliver it to multiple channelsSimplified process for participating in EuropeanaEasily create collaborative, cross-search projectsApps & widgets
Downsides: Limited direct audienceMapping your data
Return on Investment: Political312,149 searches in 2012Not a public-facing service – primary audiences are museums and academics
Culture Grid
BSI PAS 197 BSI PAS 198
ACCREDITATION BENCHMARKS
WORLDWIDE COMMUNITY (7,600)
COMPLIANCE(23,000)
GUIDANCEPDF/XML/PRINT+ SCHEMA
NEW IDEAS
How you share your collections online is defined by your audience, your culture, your values and your mission.
High-quality images of high-value items, decent SEO and an API will unlock pretty much all of these options
Commercial activity rarely generates profit, but it can deliver income that can be re-invested in opening up the collection.
A very small proportion of your collection is likely to be commercially valuable – be harsh with yourself (or get someone else to be)
Sharing high-quality images for open non-commercial use drives value and new business to commercial image sales.
With an open, standards-compliant, well-documented API (& a SPECTRUM-compliant system), you can make use of metadata-based promotional tools without having to do additional work.
Key messages:
Please help me build on this research:
http://tiny.cc/sharingcollections
Nick PooleChief Executive, Collections Trust
http://www.slideshare.net/nickpoole
twitter @NickPoole1
![Just-Right Consistency Geo-distributed DB[ Just-Right Consistency ] [ dotScale Paris 2018-06-01 ] Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Intl. License You are free to: • Share](https://static.fdocuments.us/doc/165x107/5f4af1c51ed97844592ed582/just-right-consistency-geo-distributed-db-just-right-consistency-dotscale.jpg)
