Based on eight
The VRA participants
had a fairly high degree of familiarity with the AMICO database. Most
had used it extensively and some had developed AMICO applications.
The overall appearance
and functionality of the RLG application was rated very highly by
these participants. A few exceptions, or observations of note, were:
- the new image
frames should be correctly sized and perhaps have a fixed location
- the pick lists
as implemented might not scale well
- image only
views needed at least a creator, and perhaps a creator/title caption
- there might
be one too many sizes of images (full screen?)
- saving the
notebook will be a good innovation
AMICO were overwhelmingly
to link/or incorporate, AAT/ULAN. Abstracting and indexing services
ranked second, but considerably below AAT/ULAN. All other secondary
and tertiary targets, including textbooks, encyclopedias, and journals,
ranked lower than primary sources from archives or museums.
Generally existing AMICO delivery
strategies were endorsed. VRA participants favored separate media
files rather than authored multimedia; 1024x768 lower boundaries for
images, with black and white only for items which are b/w in their
originals. However, they were happy to accept watermarks on higher
resolution images. In generally they felt that cataloging in the language
of the repository should be accompanied by indexes in English.
VRA participants were
uniformly willing to accept item-level rights limitations; only two
felt we should continue to exclude everything that did not have full
rights. Only one participant was willing to accept text without images.
While they felt that links to rights holders, and perhaps to agreements,
were desirable they were not interested in paying for them. On the
other hand, they felt that an AMICO Library with substantial contemporary
art content was worth 10-20% extra.
VRA participants did not think
any new categories of users were necessary. They agreed that downloading,
classroom projection, research and course web site mounting uses were
essential and showed considerable willingness to give up overlay,
manipulation and incorporation into new works.
On the other hand, they
strongly felt that retaining access after the license was important
and were willing to pay an average of $10 per image for that right.
They accepted all other prohibitions on use that are currently in
Surprisingly those who responded
were willing to report on modification as a condition of receiving
rights to modify.
Interestingly, VRA curators
agreed that heaviest use would take place in libraries, with home
as second. Visual Resources Collections, classroom, and offices ranked
VRA curators raked links
to local slide holdings as most important, followed by course web
sites. They overwhelmingly ranked ULAN "interoperability" highest
in the metadata links, with AAT a distant second and MARC, VRA core
and DC as "also rans".
VRA curators believed almost
uniformly that exhibition history was the most important new content
to add to AMICO. Scholarly essays came second.