the byte-sized collections of art museums

Leonardo

The Byte-Sized Collections of Art MuseumsAuthor(s): Maxwell L. AndersonSource: Leonardo, Vol. 29, No. 3 (1996), pp. 242-243Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1576261 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 06:52

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLeonardo.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.55 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 06:52:10 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mitpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1576261?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


The Byte-Sized Collections of Art Museums Maxwell L. Anderson

In the few minutes at my disposal, I will touch on both current and impending opportunities and challenges facing art museums as primary "content providers" in the electronic age. Let me be clear about a couple of matters at the outset: I am an unreconstructed con- noisseur in a world of intellectual rela- tivism, an adherent to the belief that an art museum is primarily a place to en- counter original works of art, and only secondarily a bazaar, eatery, and night- club. It should, in my antiquated view, exist to champion authenticity and

originality in a world gone mad with simulacra of cultivation and the substi- tution of soundbites for insights. Fur- thermore, I don't consider information

technology to be a panacea for what ails museums. If a collection is modest in size or quality, a networked com-

puter won't help that. As larger museums struggle to con-

nect disparate departments with com-

peting philosophies, conservative attitudes about the information age, and other demands on the institution for its survival, the results have been slow and usually less innovative than at smaller institutions. By way of example, the Krannert Art Museum of the Uni-

versity of Urbana-Champaign in Illinois was arguably the first in the nation to

explore the potential of Mosaic, the

compelling new multimedia program available over the Internet. The Krannert simply posted a so-called home page on the Internet with attrac- tive color photographs of its exterior and a few objects in the collection, and was followed by other larger institutions, but only slowly. Even today, the National Museum of American Art and the Dallas Museum of Art are the only large American art museums using the Internet broadly for image dissemina- tion, while a host of smaller museums have feistily begun probing the potential of this new friendly interface.

The intellectual property of art museums need not be handled exclusively by highly paid cogitators. At the risk of sounding self-serving, I would like to acquaint you with some of the digital goings-on at the Carlos Museum. Some

Maxwell L. Anderson, Michael C. Carlos Museum, Emory University, 571 South Kilgo Street, Atlanta, GA 30322, U.S.A.

days ago, a nineteen-year old was in our Exhibition Design Studio in Atlanta, merging images through Adobe

Photoshop with a virtual reality program called Virtus Walkthrough, and

configuring, with the review of our chief designer, a 3D walkthrough of our

upcoming exhibitions. This same stu- dent helped us prepare a 3D tour of an exhibition planned for the Olympics, and by dropping digitized images at a cost of 90 cents per image into a Photo- CD and then transferring them into an inexpensive software program, we pro- duced a demo that was presented to the Atlanta City Council and won an in- kind grant towards the exhibition, worth well over a hundred thousand dollars. We now plan to offer upcoming exhibitions to corporations and foundations in this way via CD-ROM, and the NEH is interested in setting up a mechanism so that shows can be re- viewed in this way by peer panels in the future. The next step is for museums to offer visitable exhibitions to each other over the Internet, and that day is com- ing sooner than we can imagine.

The bookshop is beginning to market our published titles on-line, and to receive orders by e-mail. We ultimately hope to eliminate expensive mailer-order flyers entirely, and provide an on- line service for direct sales by electronic means, or e-cash, without printing costs. More dramatically still, we are finding that producing a CD-ROM instead of a softcover exhibition cata- logue may be cost-effective, and are producing our first electronic cata- logue this spring at a cost of under $20,000. We are able to keep production cost down, I hasten to add, by using a neighboring university's multimedia lab and the time and talent of its undergraduates and graduate students. Our sales projections are predi- cated on the following observations: if three to five percent of exhibition-visit- ing Americans, on average, buy catalogues, the market is far too small to be profitable for a museum our size. But if we can tap into an even smaller percentage of the some 18 million and growing CD-ROM owners eager for en- riching content, we'll be more effective than ever at publishing scholarship.

The next logical step, of circumvent- ing shrink-wrapped technology like CD-

ROMs, and publishing on-line, is already on the horizon. In one week we will launch a new interactive service by means of Mosaic-again, a freeware product available to any of you-which will allow our members to pull down the newsletter on their home computer, kids in our kids' club to do interactive

puzzles and get a bounce-back view of the correct completed puzzle, members to comment on the Museum via e-mail into a cyberspace comment book, staff to be available by means of a color image of the staff in each department at work in the conservation lab, design studio, curatorial offices, and so on, ac-

companied by a descriptive paragraph of their duties, e-mail address, a bi- weekly auditorium with a member of the staff, and a dozen other exciting features including illustrated exhibition and program previews and sound clips for upcoming concerts at the Museum.

Our next step will be to offer those members who are on the Internet an im- proved electronic service, for which we will charge at least as much as a current membership, but at a fraction of the current cost to us. They will have a monthly forum with me in an electronic auditorium as an incentive to be eco- friendly, and may elect to cease receiv- ing printed material from the museum. Our printing and postage costs will pro- gressively drop, while we anticipate growth in membership-including members from all over the globe. Our university's technology division con- firmed that over 15,000 users from 33 countries have logged onto our Mosaic program in the last three months-and we therefore plan to introduce "virtual memberships" to those outside of a 200- mile radius at a reduced rate. Microsoft and Visa have already struck a deal to in- augurate electronic cash soon. Once e- cash becomes the preferred method of payment, we may be in a position to at- tract a small percentage of those users to join the Museum if we can continue to innovate in this field.

The Museum's greatest intellectual property challenges will surface next year with an initiative to provide, via Mo- saic, access to our image database, so that anyone can pull down a 256-color image from our permanent collection and browse the storerooms, as well as pull down video, voice-over, and anima-

242 Intellectual Property Rights and the Arts



tion. We will be adding incrementally to what is offered over the Internet-we

currently have 70 images uploaded-as we work out the thorny issue of site li-

censing, instead of object-by-object permissions. Instead of viewing publishing as the production of large and expensive catalogues which are instantly out- dated and decreasingly consulted, we

plan to publish in a way that can be con-

tinuously updated if the spirit moves us.

Again, none of this requires a large multimedia budget. The costs are dropping fast, and the talent pool is widening as

college students weaned on video games are training for a profession which is

only in its embryonic stages. The primary obstacle to art museums

on-line is not technological but legal. The MUSE Educational Media group here in New York is at work to resolve the primary challenges to the next two

phases of information technology in art museums: the protection of intellectual

property rights in CD-ROMs and on- line. CD-ROMs are likely to be the Betamaxes of the 1990s. So let's move on to my last task, which is to tell you about an exciting pilot project soon to be launched, called the Museum Edu- cational Site Licensing Project, which is also under the auspices of MUSE Edu- cational Media, and has been embraced

by AAM and AAMD. On-line publishing is a new area; cur-

rently we lack most of what we need: standards for image description, resolu- tion, and security, or for accessing digitized museum material through academic networks. While slides are

costly to duplicate, digital images can be easily, cheaply and accurately repli- cated in endless multiples. This techno-

logical difference requires new

licensing paradigms to protect and

compensate copyright holders in dis-

tributing their works over a network, since object-by-object permissions will be impossible to keep up with. The networked distribution of museum mate-

tion. We will be adding incrementally to what is offered over the Internet-we

currently have 70 images uploaded-as we work out the thorny issue of site li-

censing, instead of object-by-object permissions. Instead of viewing publishing as the production of large and expensive catalogues which are instantly out- dated and decreasingly consulted, we

plan to publish in a way that can be con-

tinuously updated if the spirit moves us.

Again, none of this requires a large multimedia budget. The costs are dropping fast, and the talent pool is widening as

college students weaned on video games are training for a profession which is

only in its embryonic stages. The primary obstacle to art museums

on-line is not technological but legal. The MUSE Educational Media group here in New York is at work to resolve the primary challenges to the next two

phases of information technology in art museums: the protection of intellectual

property rights in CD-ROMs and on- line. CD-ROMs are likely to be the Betamaxes of the 1990s. So let's move on to my last task, which is to tell you about an exciting pilot project soon to be launched, called the Museum Edu- cational Site Licensing Project, which is also under the auspices of MUSE Edu- cational Media, and has been embraced

by AAM and AAMD. On-line publishing is a new area; cur-

rently we lack most of what we need: standards for image description, resolu- tion, and security, or for accessing digitized museum material through academic networks. While slides are

costly to duplicate, digital images can be easily, cheaply and accurately repli- cated in endless multiples. This techno-

logical difference requires new

licensing paradigms to protect and

compensate copyright holders in dis-

tributing their works over a network, since object-by-object permissions will be impossible to keep up with. The networked distribution of museum mate-

rial with associated descriptive data is an entirely new way to make museum collections available for study, research and enjoyment. The potential variety and quantity of content providers and users argues for developing an efficient administrative, legal and financial framework to simplify the process of

distributing and retrieving information.

Unfortunately, some universities are

beginning to digitize museum material without prior approval, which may hinder reaching agreements with rights holders on terms and conditions of use.

Impending lawsuits will only delay wide-

spread academic use of digitized museum content, as well as access to vast amounts of material in museum stor-

age. Several museums are already re-

questing funding for digitization from funding sources-and those sources, from the NEH to private foundations, have begun to declare a hiatus in spon- soring such projects until several issues are resolved. Before significant funds are spent on well-intentioned but stand- alone projects, image and documenta- tion standards should be developed that will support continued and future use of digitized images. Participants should be able to design mutually ac-

ceptable solutions through this Site Li-

censing Project. Museums, colleges and universities are natural "digital" part- ners who share many common interests, as well as complementary skills.

They would both benefit from efficient administrative mechanisms to distribute

museum-provided images and text.

Digitization of high-quality images would let museums play a new role as electronic lending libraries, loaning im-

ages of paintings, sculptures, prints and archives to students and faculty in countless academic locations, stimulat-

ing awareness of the location of works and thereby encouraging visitation.

Museum and educational institutions will thus participate in a structured two-

year test process to explore systematically

rial with associated descriptive data is an entirely new way to make museum collections available for study, research and enjoyment. The potential variety and quantity of content providers and users argues for developing an efficient administrative, legal and financial framework to simplify the process of

distributing and retrieving information.

Unfortunately, some universities are

beginning to digitize museum material without prior approval, which may hinder reaching agreements with rights holders on terms and conditions of use.

Impending lawsuits will only delay wide-

spread academic use of digitized museum content, as well as access to vast amounts of material in museum stor-

age. Several museums are already re-

questing funding for digitization from funding sources-and those sources, from the NEH to private foundations, have begun to declare a hiatus in spon- soring such projects until several issues are resolved. Before significant funds are spent on well-intentioned but stand- alone projects, image and documenta- tion standards should be developed that will support continued and future use of digitized images. Participants should be able to design mutually ac-

ceptable solutions through this Site Li-

censing Project. Museums, colleges and universities are natural "digital" part- ners who share many common interests, as well as complementary skills.

They would both benefit from efficient administrative mechanisms to distribute

museum-provided images and text.

Digitization of high-quality images would let museums play a new role as electronic lending libraries, loaning im-

ages of paintings, sculptures, prints and archives to students and faculty in countless academic locations, stimulat-

ing awareness of the location of works and thereby encouraging visitation.

Museum and educational institutions will thus participate in a structured two-

year test process to explore systematically

various network distribution techniques, approaches to image security, and academic applications of museum materials in order to build efficient administrative mechanisms. Common test data and ana-

lytical review techniques will yield accu- rate comparisons of diverse systems at different test sites. Test results should be the basis for developing standards of academic access and use guidelines to be in-

corporated in site licenses.

Legal issues need clarification based

upon actual situations. Most legal com- mentators do not believe that "fair use" will provide a sufficient legal basis for students and faculty to use electronic

images of museum-owned material with

anything approaching the levels of con-

templated use. Furthermore, the new

technology has potential academic applications that are outside the scope of

previous "fair use" guidelines. The gen- eral uncertainty about electronic rights requires a prominent test to help sort out the issues. An academic test involv-

ing a substantial number of images is an ideal context for educational users and content-owners to explore relevant

legal issues, and to test solutions without relying on the courts.

So we've glimpsed some aspects of information technology in art museums. I

suspect that this barely charted territory is intimidating to most of us, unless we're a bit cavalier, and yet the only al- ternative to grappling with this technol-

ogy ourselves is to be helped along by commercial entities with a secondary in- terest in art education and appreciation. We certainly appear to be temptingly byte-sized for many multimedia con-

glomerates, but I am hopeful that we can manage our own fates to avoid be-

ing gobbled up by waves of content-seek- ers. So, however reluctant museums may be to dip our toes into the electronic ocean for fear of shock, I think it is in our best interests to do so, and AAMD will try to be one of those organizations to provide protective gear for the swim.

various network distribution techniques, approaches to image security, and academic applications of museum materials in order to build efficient administrative mechanisms. Common test data and ana-

lytical review techniques will yield accu- rate comparisons of diverse systems at different test sites. Test results should be the basis for developing standards of academic access and use guidelines to be in-

corporated in site licenses.

Legal issues need clarification based

upon actual situations. Most legal com- mentators do not believe that "fair use" will provide a sufficient legal basis for students and faculty to use electronic

images of museum-owned material with

anything approaching the levels of con-

templated use. Furthermore, the new

technology has potential academic applications that are outside the scope of

previous "fair use" guidelines. The gen- eral uncertainty about electronic rights requires a prominent test to help sort out the issues. An academic test involv-

ing a substantial number of images is an ideal context for educational users and content-owners to explore relevant

legal issues, and to test solutions without relying on the courts.

So we've glimpsed some aspects of information technology in art museums. I

suspect that this barely charted territory is intimidating to most of us, unless we're a bit cavalier, and yet the only al- ternative to grappling with this technol-

ogy ourselves is to be helped along by commercial entities with a secondary in- terest in art education and appreciation. We certainly appear to be temptingly byte-sized for many multimedia con-

glomerates, but I am hopeful that we can manage our own fates to avoid be-

ing gobbled up by waves of content-seek- ers. So, however reluctant museums may be to dip our toes into the electronic ocean for fear of shock, I think it is in our best interests to do so, and AAMD will try to be one of those organizations to provide protective gear for the swim.

Protecting Intellectual Property: New Technologies-New Paradigms

Protecting Intellectual Property: New Technologies-New Paradigms

Ivan G. Seidenberg Ivan G. Seidenberg

Good morning, everyone. I want to thank you for inviting me here, and al-

lowing your local telephone man to share this morning with you. I got a let- ter from the Executive Director of the

Good morning, everyone. I want to thank you for inviting me here, and al-

lowing your local telephone man to share this morning with you. I got a let- ter from the Executive Director of the

Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astro-

physics, who wrote me and said, "Here are three questions." And, for the last two weeks I've been studying to answer these three essay questions. I'm going to

Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astro-

physics, who wrote me and said, "Here are three questions." And, for the last two weeks I've been studying to answer these three essay questions. I'm going to

try to answer the questions that Roger Malina gave me, from two standpoints.

Ivan G. Seidenberg, NYNEX Corporation, 1113 Westchester Avenue, Room 467, White Plains, NY 10604, U.S.A.

try to answer the questions that Roger Malina gave me, from two standpoints.

Ivan G. Seidenberg, NYNEX Corporation, 1113 Westchester Avenue, Room 467, White Plains, NY 10604, U.S.A.

Intellectual Property Rights and the Arts 243 Intellectual Property Rights and the Arts 243



the byte-sized collections of art museums

Documents