Stanley G. Wold Visual Resource Center and Library, Department of Art, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
On site attendees: Meghan Rubenstein (Colorado College), Hannah Unsderfer (Regis University), Elaine Paul (University of Colorado Boulder), Heather Seneff (University of Denver), Anna Bernhard (Colorado State University), Lia Pileggi (University of Colorado Boulder), Alex Watkins (University of Colorado Boulder, Jennifer Mayer (University of Wyoming Laramie), Amanda Lehman (University of Wyoming Laramie)
Remote attendees: Heather Kline (University of New Mexico), Krystle Kelley (University of Colorado Boulder)
After the chapter business meeting, the on-site attendees were joined by Jennifer Mayer and Amanda Lehman, librarians from the University of Wyoming Laramie, and by Alex Watkins from the University of Colorado Boulder. The three are not members of VRA but belong to the ARLIS Mountain West Chapter. Anna Bernhard gave the on-site group a terrific tour of some of the studios and spaces in the Department of Art and Art History. The final stop was an exhibit of new work by the artist Glenda Drew, which is installed in a small Electronic Art gallery space near the Visual Resource Center. Attendees then walked across campus to have lunch in the student run Aspen Grill (which was delicious). Upon our return to the VRC, Krystle Kelley, graduate student assistant in the Department of Art and Art History’s Visual Resources Center at the University of Colorado Boulder, joined the meeting remotely. We were also joined by some CSU colleagues of Anna Bernhard, who are not members of VRA. These included Suzanne Hale, Registrar for the University Art Museum, and Debbie McClelland, Holly Fiedler, and Mark Shelstad of the Digital Collections department at CSU.
Anna Bernhard, Meghan Rubenstein, Amanda Lehman, Lia Pileggi, Heather Seneff, Elaine Paul, Jennifer Mayer, and Hannah Unsderfer
Artist’s Talk: Glenda Drew
Cyane Tornatzky, associate professor in electronic media at CSU, introduced Glenda Drew to the group. Glenda talked about her work via Skype from UC Davis, where she teaches. (http://redrocketmedia.com/glenda/). In the discussion after her talk, the complications of archiving new media came up. Some of Glenda’s older work is on Super 8 movie film, for example; she keeps legacy machines to play outdated media and migrates when she can. Glenda wonders how much is being lost? But at the same time, an enormous amount is being saved, too. Where do we keep it? Cyane remarked that the Library of Congress has switched back to vinyl storage for the permanence and quality of that medium. Glenda comments that her work is more about content than format. Recently she wants to move to a more physical output for her work—like a product that can be touched. She and Cyane both feel that students respond positively towards the physical output, like a print out. Anna suggests that both process and play have a role in Glenda’s work and that this is true of technology in general—a record of the process is important but hard to address. Elaine asks Glenda what her “dream archiving system” would be? Glenda backs everything up herself and doesn’t trust the cloud. She finds that students are the Facebook generation and don’t understand file formats or file structure (visually formatting a hierarchy of files, etc.).
Works in Progress: Hannah Unsderfer
Hannah (Digital Collections Librarian at Regis University) talked about her experiences during a data migration process at work. She described the process as similar to peeling an onion (in which each layer removed reveals more layers) with occasional tears. Hannah started her half-time position in January of this year just as Regis was experiencing some turnover and a re-organization. She was to oversee the migration of their ILS (integrated library system) and their smaller digital repository after a consortial agreement/alliance had dissolved. The digital repository was to go to Shared Shelf, but even with extensive planning ahead including timelines and inventories, all the hurdles are never anticipated. Lack of technical support and funding at Regis were key factors in choosing Shared Shelf, which has an established support structure. Since the project was so small it wasn’t cost effective to purchase software to help with the data cleanup and file naming issues. New naming conventions were established and improved communication with the library and Regis in general will minimize future problems. Hannah did most of this work by hand. Her audience commends her for being so cheerful about all this. She is just now digging in to Shared Shelf and is creating manuals and training documents. Her advice for projects like this: Flexible deadlines. Work in small batches.
Works in Progress: Suzanne Hale
Suzanne (Registrar at the CSU University Art Museum) has proposed a session for the AAM (American Alliance of Museums) conference called “Rediscovering the Original Object.” There will be four presenters with Suzanne acting as a moderator, who will then lead the discussion afterwards. She feels that all the issues and procedures around the objects take over—the breadth and scope of the museum and/or library world (including HR, budget, facilities, educational programming, etc.), has grown beyond the object? The presenters will start with statements and then Suzanne will ask questions like: Does access to a surrogate make you revere the object more? Elaine suggests that the surrogate can change your perception of the object (for example size or scale—from a projected slide to the actual dimensions of the Mona Lisa). One of the CSU Digital Collections staff comments that surrogates made with new technologies like x-ray and infrared photography actually make comments on the objects (add to knowledge). Elaine brings up Aaron Straup Cope, Head of Engineering, Cooper Hewitt, who spoke at the annual VRA conference in Denver about collecting and curating the visitor’s experience at an exhibition using new technologies (surrogates of the objects collected at the visitor’s behest). Suzanne brings up another question: Do we/should we digitize everything? Does the digital experience overwhelm the object, removing scale and context? What about objects that are bequeathed/donated with certain conditions of exposure or are important to evaluate as a collection rather than as a series of separate objects? Anna brings up the use of cell phones in museums—not only does everyone have a cell phone camera out in the exhibition but they walk through the exhibition more quickly. Technology changes the way we experience objects in the exhibition setting. Meghan mentions the “Viewing Project” from several years ago at the Indianapolis Museum of Art which addressed the impact of technology on examining art objects. Suzanne adds that television/video screens draw people in—eyes are pulled to the screen. When you are in a museum that displays a video and an art object, the viewer is drawn to the screen. Elaine wonders if we are trying to control behavior. Two other questions Suzanne will pose to her panel: Is virtual access to an object to more people a benefit that outweighs the immersive experience? What experience have you had in your museum that you would like to share in your work? For her own part, Suzanne recalls her experience with a work by Wendell Castle called “Ghost Clock,” which she saw in person in an exhibit and was particularly struck with the physicality of the object, something that would not have been apparent virtually (with a surrogate).
Works in progress: Elaine Paul
Elaine discussed her involvement with Research Data Management in the Arts and Humanities on the UC Boulder campus. She feels it is a natural role for VR professionals. Big data is considered mostly in the sciences but also plays a role in the Humanities. Often professors in the humanities don’t realize that they have been doing “Research Data Management” all along using a different terminology and methodology. Understanding the terms and concepts opens funding sources to digital humanities projects. The sciences are used to constraints on their data management because of federal funding sources and institutional rules. Elaine feels outreach to the humanities about research data management is important—explains that it means taking control of your digital objects! Dealing with organization, security, archiving, and disposal. She tells us about DMPtool which helps devise management plans and processes.
Welcome: Meghan Rubenstein
Meghan Rubenstein is the new Curator of Visual Resources at Colorado College in Colorado Springs. As a new VR professional she shared some of her recent adventures in visual resources. She commends her predecessor’s meticulous record keeping and the state of her facility in the Art Department. Meghan is not entirely new to the VR field, having worked with Eileen Fry at Indiana University while she was a graduate student there, and at other VR collections during her academic pursuits. She is having trouble being everywhere at once, however, as she tries to do outreach on campus and meet with people in the libraries and other departments! She has no permanent staff to help and only a few student workers (she is lobbying for more student help). She is enjoying her new position, her colleagues, and Colorado Springs. (https://www.coloradocollege.edu/academics/dept/art/people/staff_profiles/rubenstein_meghan.dot)
–submitted by Wild West Chapter secretary Heather Seneff, November 5, 2015
From left to right: Meghan, Elaine, Josh, and Patti attending the Wild West Chapter Meeting
VRA Wild West Chapter 