share or sharealike – deciding how, when and where to share your digital content
DESCRIPTION
Presentation given at UKMW12, the Museums Computer Group's Museums on the Web 'Strategically Digital' conference, Wellcome Collection, London, November 30, 2012TRANSCRIPT
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
http://www.google.com/culturalinstitute
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