No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Open concepts: museum digital documentation for education through The AMICO Library™
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 June 2016
Abstract
As education and research institutions struggle to come to terms with networked resources, new kinds of organizations and partnerships are emerging to support the distribution of networked cultural heritage information. The Art Museum Image Consortium (AMICO) provides an example of how museums have collaborated, in a manner that respects the requirements of education and research, to enhance access to the digital multimedia documenting their collections. AMICO has responded to librarians’ concerns about administration, economics, access and use in this new information environment, leveraging resources and - it is hoped - providing cost-effective, unprecedented access to cultural multimedia.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Art Libraries Society 2002
References
AAM
2000. American Association of Museums. Museum guide to copyright and trademarks. Table of contents online at http://www.aam-us.org/museum-guide-toc.html
Google Scholar
AAT. The art & architecture thesaurus. (http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/aat/)Google Scholar
AHDS. Art and Humanities Data Service - a service of the Joint Information Systems Committee in the UK. (http://ahds.ac.uk/).Google Scholar
AIC. Digital Library Federation. Academic Image Cooperative. (http://www.clir.org/diglib/collections/aic.htm)Google Scholar
AMICO
2000. Trant, Jennifer, Richmond, Kelly and Bearman, David. ‘Collaborative cultural resource creation: the example of the Art Museum Image Consortium’. Museums and the Web 2000, Minneapolis, MN, April 17, 2000, http://www.archimuse.com/mw2000/papers/trant/index.html.Google Scholar
AMICO University Testbed
1998. Reports of the AMICO University Testbed Project (http://www.amico.org/)Google Scholar
Anderson,
1994. Anderson, Maxwell. ‘Perils and pleasures of the virtual museum’. Museum news vol. 73 no. 6
1994, p.37–38, 64.Google Scholar
Anderson,
1997. Anderson, Maxwell L. ‘Introduction’, in The wired museum, edited by Jones-Garmill, Katherine. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums, 1997.Google Scholar
ARL Principles 1997. Principles for licensing electronic resources, endorsed by American Association of Law Libraries, American Library Association, Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries, Association of Research Libraries, Medical Library Association, Special Libraries Association, July 15, 1997. (http://www.arl.org/scomm/licensing/principles.html)Google Scholar
ArtsConnectEd 2000. Dowden, Robin, Sayre, Scott and Dietz, Steve. ‘ArtsConnectEd: collaboration in the integration and access to museum resources’. First Monday vol. 5 no. 6 June 2000, http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_6/dowden/index.html.Google Scholar
ARTSTOR. A project of the Mellon, Andrew W. Foundation. (http://www.mellon.org/artstor%20announcement.html)Google Scholar
Baca, /Harpring,
1996. Baca, Murtha and Harpring, Patricia, eds. ‘Art Information Task Force. Categories for the description of works of art’. Visual Resources vol. 11 no. 3-4
1996, p.241–436.Google Scholar
Bailey, /Graham,
1999. Bailey, Chris and Graham, Margaret E. ‘Compare and contrast: measuring the impact of digital imaging on the discipline of art history’. DRH99 Conference Proceedings, http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/drh/programmc.htm.Google Scholar
Bailey, /Graham,
2000. The corpus and the art historian. CIIIA London 2000: thirtieth International Congress of the History of Art History for the Millenium: Lime. Section 23: Digital art history time, London, 3-8 September 2000, http://www.unites.uqam.ca/AHWA/Meetings/2000.CIHA/Bailey.html.Google Scholar
Baru,
1999. Baru, Chatanya. ‘AMICO: the art of managing art’. Data intensive computing environments vol. 15 no. 3
1999, http://www.npaci.edu/enVision/vl5.3/amico.html.Google Scholar
Bearman, , 1989a. Bearman, David. ‘A framework for museum standards’. Spectra vol. 16 no. 2 Summer 1989, p.1–5.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1991. Bearman, David. ‘Museum information standards: progress and prospects’ in
Spivak, Stephen M. and Winsell, Keith A., eds. A sourcebook of standards information. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1991, p.253–265.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1992. Bearman, David. ‘Multimedia and museum requirements for networking’ in
Multimedia and networking: proceedings of the Library of Congress Network Advisory Committee meeting December 7-9 1992. (Network Planning Paper #24) Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1993, p. 16–23; reprinted in Spectra vol.21 no. 2
1992, p.15–19.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1994a. Bearman, David. ‘Thesaurally mediated retrieval’. Visual resources vol. 10
1994, p.295–307.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1994b. Bearman, David. ‘Cultural heritage information standards in a networked world’ in
Prometheus: new technologies in culture. Athens: Lambrakis Research Eoundation, 1994, p. 39–52; revised in Archives and museum informatics, vol. 8 no. 2
1994, p.91–107.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1995a. Bearman, David. ‘Standards for networked cultural heritage’. Archives and museum informatics vol. 9
1995, p.279–307.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1995b. Bearman, David ‘Data relationships in the documentation of cultural objects’ in
Categories for description of works of art, a special issue of Visual Resources vol. 11
1995, p.295–306.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1995c. Bearman, David, ‘information strategies and structures for electronic museums’ in
Information: the hidden resource, museums and the Internet. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the MDA, 1995, ed. by Fahy, Anne and Sudbury, Wendy. Cambridge, UK: Museum Documentation Association, 1995, p.5–22.Google Scholar
Bearman,
1995d. Bearman, David. ‘Museum strategies for success on the Internet’. Museum collections and the information superhighway. London: Science Museum, 1995, p.15–27; also published in Spectra vol. 22 no. 4, p.18–24. (http://www.nmsi.ac.uk/infosh/bearman.htm)Google Scholar
Bearman,
1996. Bearman, David. Research agenda for networked cultural heritage. Santa Monica, CA: Getty Art History Information Program, 1996, p.7–22 (Introduction); p.63–67 ‘Archiving and authenticity’ (chapter cited).Google Scholar
Bearman,
et al
1999. Bearman, David
et al. ‘A common model to support interoperable metadata. Progress report on reconciling metadata requirements from the Dublin Core and INDECS/DOI communities’. D-Lib Magazine vol. 5 no. 1 January 1999, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january99/bearman/01bearman.html.Google Scholar
Bearman, /Perkins,
1993. Bearman, David with Perkins, John. ‘The standards framework for computer interchange of museum information’. Spectra vol. 20 nos. 2 & 3, p. 1–61. (CIMI Standards Framework)Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1997a. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds and intro. Museum interactive multimedia 1997: cultural heritage systems design and interfaces. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 1997.Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1997b. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer. ‘Beyond simple resource discovery: a framework for metadata declarations of disciplinary schema to support research in heterogeneous collections’. International Symposium on Information Technology in Museums - Integrated Applications, Bonn, Germany, December 1-2, 1997.Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1997c. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer. ‘Museums and intellectual property: rethinking rights management for a digital world’. Fair Use, the great image debate, a special issue of Visual Resources vol. XII no. 3-4
1997, p.269–280.Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1998a. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer. ‘Authenticity of digital resources: towards a statement of requirements in the research process’. D-Lib Magazine June 1998, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june98/06bearman.html.Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1998b. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer. ‘Unifying cultural memory’. Information landscapes for a learning society, Networking and the Future of Libraries (UKOLN: The UK Office of Library and Information Networking) vol. 3
1998, p.207–234. (www.archimuse.com/papers/ukoln98paper/index.html)Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1998c. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer. ‘Economic, social, technical models for digital libraries of primary resources: the example of the Art Museum Image Consortium’. New review of information networking no. 4
1998, p.71–91. (http://www.archimuse.com/publishing/amico/)Google Scholar
Bearman, /Trant,
1999. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds and intro. Cultural heritage informatics: selected papers from ichim99. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 1999.Google Scholar
Besser, /Trant,
1995. Besser, Howard and Trant, Jennifer. Introduction to imaging: issues in constructing an image database. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 1995.Google Scholar
Besser, /Yamashita,
1998. Besser, Howard and Yamashita, Robert, eds. The cost of digital image distribution: the social and economic implications of the production, distribution and usage of image data. A report to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Berkeley: UCB School of Information Management, 1998.Google Scholar
Birdsey,
2000. Birdsey, Claire. ‘Creating accessible digital imagery’. D-Lib Magazine April 2000, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april00/birdsey/04birdsey.html.Google Scholar
Bissel,
2000. Bissel, Torsten
et al. ‘Protecting a museum’s digital stock through watermarks’ in
Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds. Selected papers from Museums and the Web 2000. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 2000. (http://www.archimuse.com./mw2000/papers/bissel/bissel.html)Google Scholar
Blackaby, /Sandore,
1997. Blackaby, Jim and Sandore, Beth. ‘Building integrated museum information retrieval systems: practical approaches to data organization and access’. Archives and museum informatics vol. 11 no. 2
1997, p.117–146.Google Scholar
Bower,
1993. Bower, James. ‘Vocabulary control and the virtual database’. Knowledge organization vol. 20
1993, p.4–7.Google Scholar
CDWA
Categories for the description of works of art. The report of the Art Information Task Force, a joint project of the College Art Association and the Getty, J. Paul Trust. (http://www.getty.edu/research/institute/standards/cdwa/)Google Scholar
Chapman, /Comstock,
2000. Chapman, Stephen and Comstock, William. ‘Digital imaging production services at the Harvard College Library’. RLG DigiNews December 2000, http://www.rlg.org/preserv/diginews/diginews4-6.html#featurel.Google Scholar
CIMI (Consortium for the Computer Interchange of Museum Information), (http://www.cimi.org/)Google Scholar
CLIR
2000. Collections, content, and the Web. Council on Library and Information Resources, January 2000.Google Scholar
Crane,
2001. Crane, Gregory
et al. ‘Drudgery and deep thought: designing digital libraries for the Humanities’. Communications of the ACM vol. 44 no. 5 May 2001, p.34–30.Google Scholar
Dale, /Beagrie,
2000. Dale, Robin and Beagrie, Neil. ‘Digital Preservation Conference: Report from York, UK’. RLG DigiNews December 2000, http://www.rlg.org/preserv/diginews/diginews4-6.html#feature2.Google Scholar
Dublin Core. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (http://dublincore.org)Google Scholar
Garmill,
1997. The wired museum, edited by Jones-Garmill, Katherine. Washington, DC: American Association of Museums, 1997.Google Scholar
Graham,
1999. The description and indexing of images: report of a survey of ARIAS members, 1998/99. University of Northumbria at Newcastle: Institute for Image Data Research, May 1999. (http://www.unn.ac.uk/iidr/ARLIS/arlisrep.htm)Google Scholar
Greenhalgh,
2000. Greenhalgh, Michael. ‘Teaching and learning art history using the Web’. Thirtieth International Congress of the History of Art History for the Millenium: Time. Section 23: Digital art history time, London, 3-8 September 2000. (http://www.unites.uqam.ca/AHWA/Meetings/2000.CIHA/Greenhalgh.html)Google Scholar
Greenstein, /Trant,
1996. Greenstein, D. and Trant, J. ‘The Arts and Humanities Data Service: collecting digital research data; building a framework for digital resource preservation and interchange’. Ariadne July/August 1996, ukoln.bath.ac.uk/ariadne/.Google Scholar
Grout,
et al
2001. Grout, Catherine, Purdy, Phill and Rymer, Janine. ‘Creating digital resources for the visual arts: standards and good practice’. Visual Arts Data Service, 2001, http://vads.ahds.ac.uk/guides/creating_guide/contents.html.Google Scholar
IATH. Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, University of Virginia. (http://www.iath.uva.edu)Google Scholar
ICOLC Statement
1998. International Consortium of Library Consortia. Statement of current perspective and preferred practices for the selection and purchase of electronic information. (http://www.library.yale.edu/consortia/statement.html)Google Scholar
IMLS
2000. Museums, libraries, and the 21st century learner. (http://www.imls.gov/whatsnew/21cl/21clintro.htm)Google Scholar
IMLS Web Wise
2001. ‘The Second Annual Conference on Libraries and Museums in the Digital World, sponsored by the U.S. Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) and the University of Missouri-Columbia, 12-14 February 2001, Washington D.C.
First Monday vol. 6 no. 4 April 2nd 2001 (http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_4/index.html)Google Scholar
JISC DNER. United Kingdom, Higher Education Funding Councils, Joint Information Systems Committee, Distributed Networked Electronic Resource, (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/)Google Scholar
JISC. Joint Information Systems Committee. Supported by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, the Learning and Skills Council, the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council, the Scottish Further Education Funding Council, the Welsh Funding Councils and the Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment, (http://www.jisc.ac.uk)Google Scholar
Lagoze,
2001. Lagoze, Carl. ‘Keeping Dublin Core simple: cross-domain discovery or resource description?’ D-Lib Magazine January 2001, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january01/lagoze/Ollagoze.html.Google Scholar
Lanzi,
1998. Lanzi, Elisa. Introduction to vocabularies: enhancing access to cultural heritage information. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Trust, 1998.Google Scholar
Lanzi, /McRae,
1999. Lanzi, Elisa and McRae, Linda, eds. ‘VRA core categories for visual resources’. VRA Bulletin vol. 25 no. 4
1999, p.29–104.Google Scholar
Lavin,
1997. Lavin, Marilyn Aronberg. ‘Making computers work for the history of art’. Art Bulletin (New York, 1997) vol. LXXIX no. 2
1997, p. 128–210.Google Scholar
LIBLICENSE. Okerson, Ann, ed. LIBLICENSE - licensing digital information: a resource for librarians. (http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/index.shtml)Google Scholar
Lynch,
1997. Lynch, Clifford. ‘The uncertain future for digital visual collections in the university’. Archives and museum informatics vol. 11 no. 1
1997, p.5–13.Google Scholar
Lynch,
1999. Lynch, Clifford. ‘On the threshold of discontinuity: the new genres of scholarly communication and the role of the research library’. ACRL National Conference, Detroit Friday, April 9, 1999, http://www.ala.org/acrl/clynch.html.Google Scholar
Marmor,
2000. Marmor, Max. ‘Imaging America: toward a digital image library for American Studies’. (http://www.georgetown.edu/crossroads/asanews/news1200/marmor.htm)Google Scholar
May,
2000. May, Michael. ‘Impact of the AMICO Library at the University of Alberta’. RLG Focus October 2000. (http://www.rlg.org/r-focus/i46impact.html)Google Scholar
McClung,
1995. McClung, Patricia. Digital Image Access Project. Research Libraries Group, Inc., 1995.Google Scholar
Mellon,
1992. Cummings, Anthony M.
University libraries and scholarly communication: a study prepared for the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Published by the Association of Research Libraries for the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, November 1992, http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/reports/mellon/mellon.html.Google Scholar
MESL
1998a. Stephenson, Christie and McClung, Patricia, eds. Delivering digital images: cultural heritage resources for education. Los Angeles: Getty Information Institute, 1998. (Museum Educational Site Licensing Project, vol. 1)Google Scholar
MESL
1998b. McClung, Patricia and Stephenson, Christie, eds. Images online: perspectives on the Museum Educational Site Licensing Project. Los Angeles: Getty Information Institute, 1998. (Museum Educational Site Licensing Project, vol. 2)Google Scholar
MW2000. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds and intro. Museums and the Web 2000: selected papers. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 2000. (http://www.archimuse.com/mw2000)Google Scholar
MW2001. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds and intro. Museums and the Web 2001: selected papers. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 2001. (http://www.archimuse.com/mw2001)Google Scholar
MW97. Bearman, David and Trant, Jennifer, eds and intro. Museums and the Web 97: selected papers. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 1997.Google Scholar
MW98. Trant, Jennifer and Bearman, David, eds and intro. Museums and the Web 98: selected papers. Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics, 1998. (http://www.archimuse.com/mw98/)Google Scholar
NHA Principles 1997. National Humanities Alliance. Basic principles for managing intellectual property in the digital environment. March 24, 1997. (http://www.ninch.org/issues/copyright/principles/nha_complete.html)Google Scholar
NINCH
Guide to good practice in the digital representation and management of cultural heritage materials. A project of the National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage. (http://www.ninch.org/PROJECTS/practice/rfprfpl.html)Google Scholar
NINCH
International database of digital humanities projects. A project of the National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage. (http://www.ninch.org/PROJECTS/data/data.html)Google Scholar
NINCH Town Meetings 2000. National Initiative for Networked Cultural Heritage. Copyright and Eair Use Town Meetings 2000. Report by David Green available at http://www.ninch.org/.Google Scholar
NISO Image Metadata Initiative. NISO. ‘Draft data dictionary: technical metadata for digital still images, Working Draft 1.0’. NISO, July 2000, http://www.niso.org/Data.Dict.html.Google Scholar
North Carolina State Library Commission. ‘Digitization best practices draft’, revised February 2001. (http://statelibrary.dcr.state.nc.us/asc/Guide/intro.htm)Google Scholar
Object, Image, Inquiry, 1988. Bakewell, E.
et al. Object, image, inquiry: the art historian at work. Getty Art History Information Program, 1988.Google Scholar
Perseus. The Perseus Project, (http://perseus.tufts.edu)Google Scholar
Pisciotta,
2000. Pisciotta, Henry. ‘Review of the AMICO Library’. CAA Reviews May 26, 2000. (http://www.caareviews.org/reviews/amico.html)Google Scholar
Rhyne,
1997. Rhyne, Charles S. ‘Student evaluation of the usefulness of computer images in art history and related disciplines’. Visual resources vol. XIII no. 1, 1997, p.67–81.Google Scholar
Rhyne,
1998. Rhyne, Charles S. ‘Images as evidence in art history and related disciplines’. VRA Bulletin (New York) vol. 25 no. 1
1998, p.59–66.Google Scholar
Roland Video: The Roland Collection of Videos and Films on Art. (http://www.roland-collection.com/)Google Scholar
Sandore, /Shaik,
1998. Sandore, Beth and Shaik, Najmuddin. ‘Report of the instructor and student evaluation of the MESL image database’ in
Delivering digital images (see MESL 1998a, above).Google Scholar
Scovill,
1995. Scovill, Linda. Librarians and publishers in the scholarly information process: transition in the electronic age. Council on Library Resources and the American Association of Publishers, 1995, http://arl.cni.Org/clr/Frontmatter.html#contents
Google Scholar
Skidmore,
1999. Skidmore, Colleen and Dowie, Sandra. ‘Camera Lucida: AMICO in an art history classroom’ in
Museums and the Web 1999, http://www.archimuse.com/mw99/papers/dowie/dowie.html.Google Scholar
Spectrum. Museum Documentation Association. SPECTRUM: the UK Museum Documentation Standard. (http://www.mda.org.uk/spectrum.htm)Google Scholar
Stam, /Giral,
1995. Stam, Dierdre and Giral, Angela, eds. ‘Linking art objects and art information’. Library trends vol. 37 no. 2
1995, p. 117–26.Google Scholar
Trant,
1992. Trant, Jennifer. ‘Integrating access to the collections of the Canadian Centre for Architecture’. Computers in the history of art, Winter
1992, p.45–64.Google Scholar
Trant,
1993. Trant, Jennifer. ‘“On speaking terms”: towards virtual integration of art information’. Knowledge organization vol. 20
1993, p.8–11.Google Scholar
Trant,
1996. Trant, Jennifer. ‘Images on the network: challenges and opportunities’. American Council of Learned Societies, Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., April 1996, and the ACLS Newsletter, http://www.acls.org/n44trant.htm.Google Scholar
Trant,
1996. Trant, Jennifer. ‘New models for distributing digital content: the Museum Educational Site Licensing Project’ in
Heidorn, p. Bryan and Sandore, Beth, eds. Digital imaging access and retrieval. 33 rd Annual Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, March 1996, Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1997, p.29–41.Google Scholar
Trant,
1996. Trant, Jennifer. The Arts and Humanities Data Service (AHDS) and the UK Office for Library and Information Networking (UKOLN): a coordinated strategy to identify shared metadata requirements. A proposal to the information Services Sub-Committee (ISSC) of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the Higher Education Funding Councils (HEFCs). Submitted by Dempsey, L. and Greenstein, D.; drafted by Trant, J.. September 6, 1996.Google Scholar
Trant,
1996. Trant, Jennifer. ‘The Getty AHIP imaging initiative: a status report’ in
Archives and museums informatics vol. 9 no. 3
1995, p.262–278, and Information services and use vol. 15 no. 4
1995, p.353–364, http://www.archimuse.com/papers/jt.eva.95.html.Google Scholar
Trant,
1996. Trant, Jennifer. ‘The Museum Educational Site Licensing (MESL) Project: an update’. Spectra
Spring
1996, http://www.archimuse.com/papers/jt.mesl.spectra9511.html.Google Scholar
Trant,
1998. Trant, Jennifer. ‘When all you’ve got’s the real thing: museums and authenticity in a networked world’. Archives and museum informatics vol. 12 no. 2
1998.Google Scholar
Trant, /Bearman,
1997. Trant, Jennifer and Bearman, D. ‘The Art Museum Image Consortium: licensing museum digital documentation for educational use’. Spectra
Fall
1997, http://www.archimuse.com/papers/amico.spectra.9708.html.Google Scholar
ULAN. Union List of Artist Names. (http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/ulan/)Google Scholar
VAGA: Visual Artists and Galleries Association, Inc., 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6305 New York, 10018, Tel: 212-736-6666, Fax: 212-736-6767Google Scholar
Van House 1996. Van House, A., Nancy
et al. ‘Usercentered iterative design for digital libraries’. D-Lib Magazine February 1996, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/february96/02vanhouse.html.Google Scholar
VRA Core. The Visual Resources Association. Core categories for visual resources. (http://www.oberlin.edu/~art/vra/wcl.html)Google Scholar
VRA Guide
2000. Visual Resources Association. The acquisition and use of images in non-profit educational visual resources collections. (http://www.oberlin.edu/~art/vra/guidelines.html)Google Scholar
Walsh, , 2000. Walsh, Peter. ‘The web, the millennium, and the clerks of nostalgia: effects of electronic media on visual studies’ in CIHA London 2000. International Congress of the History of Art History for the Millenium. Time. Section 23: Digital art history time, London, 3-8 September 2000. (http://www.unites.uqam.ca/AHWA/Meetings/2000.CIHA/Walsh.html)Google Scholar
Weibel, /Traugott,
2000. Weibel, Stuart L. and Traugott, Koch. ‘The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: mission, current activities, and future directions’. D-Lib Magazine December 2000, http://www.dlib.org/dlib/decemberOO/weibel/12weibel.html.Google Scholar
Williams,
2000. Williams, Don. ‘Image quality metrics’. RLG DigiNews August 2000, http://www.rlg.org/preserv/diginews/diginews4-4.html#technical1.Google Scholar
Zorich,
1999. Zorich, Diane M.
Managing digital assets: options for cultural and educational organizations. Los Angeles: Getty Information Institute, 1999.Google Scholar