----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Whoa...lets step back a bit. My question has to do with the earlier decision -making on WHAT collections are to be digitized first, and how is that decision being made in collections around the country. There is an interesting article in CDROM Professional, May 1995, which raises some issues. That article is "Technology meets culture at the dawn of the digital museum, CDROM Professional, May 1995, 106-111. The focus is MUSEUM collections though, not libraries. But is there a difference when it comes down to what making collections accessible beyond the walls of our institutions? ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Digitizing Maps Author: Tom Neff <[log in to unmask]> at Internet Date: 7/13/95 2:55 AM There is probably no single method of digitization that will prove sufficient for _all_ possible cartographic research purposes. As has been pointed out, line widths and other minute details which may appear useless for one class of inquiry could be the vital center of interest for another. Rectilinear rasterization may obscure or skew some characteristics of interest. And we cannot predict what new topics or concerns will arise in future decades (or centuries) - research that might be frustrated by reductive assumptions we made while digitizing the only copies of certain maps that those future researchers will ever see. I suggest, therefore, that important maps be scanned in as many *different* ways as possible, and generally at the highest resolutions and color depth remotely achievable with today's technology, no matter how big the resulting file is. The cartographers of AD 2200 will not forgive us for losing information because we want to fit more maps onto a single CD-ROM, for example. A whole CD-ROM or optical disk is no more valuable than the original map whose image it carries. I also suggest that precise vector-based acquisition be pursued, as opposed to just rasterization. For some research purposes, this is far superior and more efficient. Finally, where practicable, I suggest that representative micrographic digitization be performed in conjunction with scanning of the whole. This "spot" micrography stands the best chance of affording future researchers a glimpse at the full range of detail available to contemporary scholars in possession of the originals. Tom Neff -- Tom Neff :: [log in to unmask] :: <URL:http://www.panix.com/~tneff/>