[PRCo] Re: Generic Description and Scanning

[Jim Keener]

Just to clarify, when I said watermark I meant to claim ownership, not
copyright.  We would obviously be storing the original photographer and
put onto image shown online.

I think Dwight is worried about someone taking an image from our
archives and placing an inappropriate image in it and other things not
becoming to the museum.

It's a valid concern; no technology in the world will stop misuse of
something someone can see.  It becomes a problem of what do we, as the
museum members, feel is more important: making sure that the museum
could never be portrayed in a bad light or making sure that anyone can
look at our collection of photos and documents.

Dwight, I don't mean to put words in your mouth.  My apologizes if I'm
wrong.

Jim

On 5/22/11 9:42 PM, Herb Brannon wrote:
> What would be an example of "unwanted manipulation of the data" ?
> What would make any photograph of a PCC running down a PRCo right of way
> such a "secret prize" in the 21st Century that it should be hidden away ?
> 
>  Also, the museum cannot claim copyright on items where they themselves did
> not take the original photograph.
> 
> You're not protecting the secrets of the United States Government
> here......they're just photos of streetcars passing through time. Their main
> interest, and their main purpose, is that they offer a visual frozen moment
> of time. In this moment can be seen not just the vehicle, but the styles and
> other technologies of that moment. This, of course, happens only if they are
> allowed to be viewed by all interested parties. Like I said before, hiding
> them away certainly gives "boasting rights", but that's about all. Remember
> what Mr. Vane A. Jones used to put at the top of his magazine, Traction &
> Models, "..knowledge is of no value unless shared with others"
> 
> On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 20:20, Dwight Long <dwightlong at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> Read only files should offset the concern about any unwanted manipulation
>> of
>> the data.
>>
>> That, however, does not address the issues of copyright protection, use of
>> the data for malicious purposes, etc. As I understand it, Museum policy (Ed
>> can correct me if I am wrong) has always been to open the archives to
>> serious researchers, authors, etc.  But the current arrangements do at
>> least
>> offer some protection against some yayhoo coming in and using the Museum's
>> data for purposes inimical to the Museum's interests.  How could some
>> similar level of protection be achieved if the archives are digitally open?
>> I realize you stated that they would not have to be, but if they were?
>>
>> Dwight
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Keener" <jimktrains at gmail.com>
>> To: <pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 3:14 PM
>> Subject: [PRCo] Re: Generic Description and Scanning
>>
>>
>>> The records don't have to be editable by just anyone, if that's what you
>>> mean by losing control of the collection.
>>> We could supply nice sized images and the captions, metadata, and OCRed
>>> text to the public if that's what's desired.  The collection doesn't
>>> even have to be public, but I've never been a fan of hiding information
>>> if there is no reason to.  Public images can be watermarked quite easily
>>> and automatically.
>>>
>>> I don't have a car, but only live in Pgh, otherwise I'd be much more
>>> eager to offer my time.  I know high school juniors and seniors are
>>> always always looking for community service hours or projects to work on
>>> (they are needed to graduate in most districts).  Scanning slides,
>>> marking where they are (physically), and entering any text on the slide
>>> is defiantly doable by a high schooler (or even me:-p).
>>>
>>> Most slides I've seen have a year, company, route, and car number on
>>> them (some have a location!).  The year, company, and route number can
>>> be cross-referenced to automatically get the full route name (save time
>>> on typing it in) and the year, company, and car number can automatically
>>> grab the type of car it is.  Especially if we had a location for the
>>> slide, that's a wealth of usable knowledge right off the bat.  If that
>>> information is in a database, it immediately becomes searchable and
>>> viewable.
>>>
>>> The same goes for newspapers and other documents.  Scanning them in is
>>> labour intensive but doesn't require a lot of skill beyond being careful
>>> (which, admittedly can be an unattainable skill for some people:-\).
>>> Once it's all scanned in it can be OCRed and searchable.  As people read
>>> the documents, they could tag it as containing information about a
>>> specific car or another topic.
>>>
>>> (Yes, I know OCR isn't perfect, but it can be quite good for a good scan
>>> and as people read the documents, they can fill in the occasional wrong
>>> word.)
>>>
>>> I'm more than happy to do what I can from afar.  If I got a car, that
>>> would change, but right now I wouldn't be able to scan slides or
>>> documents at the museum.
>>>
>>> I've also never scanned slides before, so I could be completely wrong as
>>> to how much human intervention is required.
>>>
>>> Jim
>>>
>>> PS: This is what I was talking about before on trying to get some CMU
>>> kids for a project to do location finding:
>>>
>> http://server.cs.ucf.edu/~vision/projects/WhereAmI/ProjectPage-WhereAmI.htm
>>> Pgh is used because it was one of the first cities to get Street View
>>> and is very heavily mapped. (Just go to maps.google.com, search for
>>> Pittsburgh, Pa, zoom out a bit an pull the little pegman (yellow dude
>>> above the zoom slider) out and watch how much of the map turns blue.
>>> Obviouly there are a bunch of small roads not done, but the all of the
>>> semi-major roads are done.
>>>
>>> On 5/22/11 1:22 PM, Edward H. Lybarger wrote:
>>>> Clearly, Ray, the answer is yes, provided staff and funding become
>>>> available
>>>> and don't require oodles of management supervision.  I'm obviously not
>>>> eager
>>>> to lose control of the collection, either.  I'm comfortable with the
>>>> longevity of today's technology because I believe in migrating data
>>>> periodically to keep it up to date.
>>>>
>>>> But I am not going to devote the rest of my own life to scanning this
>>>> collection beyond museum needs -- both for restoration purposes and for
>>>> exhibits and publications -- because there is so very much else to do
>> and
>>>> I
>>>> will be 66 years old come August. Trolleys are not, and never will be,
>> my
>>>> whole life.  If someone is willing to come in on a regular -- and I mean
>>>> regular -- basis to do the work, and if proper scanning equipment and
>>>> storage, not to mention an adequate computer, is available, the project
>>>> will
>>>> be supported and accommodated with some vigor.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org
>>>> [mailto:pittsburgh-railways-bounce at lists.dementia.org] On Behalf Of Ray
>>>> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2011 12:56 PM
>>>> To: pittsburgh-railways at dementia.org
>>>> Subject: [PRCo] Generic Description and Scanning
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, f= irst my new and improved verizon email account has some quarks.
>>>>
>>>> I hav= e the 1979 Steeler Superbowl on VHS tape. Still plays and looks
>>>>
>>>> good = for that technology. Lets see that's about 32 years old now.
>>>> However,
>>>> I=
>>>>
>>>> understand the concern with storage media and longevity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It appears to me that every reason under the sun is being used to in=
>>>> validate
>>>>
>>>> such a project. I am tired of going  round and round on= this subject.
>> So
>>>> point blank question,
>>>>
>>>> Ed, in your life time do = you think scanning and Internet posting will
>>>> ever
>>>> occur?
>>>>
>>>> If you choos= e to answer this please a simple yes or no will do.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also= , I really hate to use the term "some people say"  but some =
>>>> people
>>>> say it is all about control.
>>>>
>>>> The museum does not want  to= lose control of the archives. Once on the
>>>> internet control is lost.
>>>>
>>>> Ray
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Attached file removed by Ecartis and put at URL below --
>>> -- Type: application/pgp-signature
>>> -- Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
>>> -- Size: 906 bytes
>>> -- URL :
>>> http://lists.dementia.org/files/pittsburgh-railways/06-signature.asc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>