Subject Access

In addition to an overview and discussion of the use of Historypin.com, which is the organizational model for our collection, here we address the unique concern of indexing photographs. 

Historypin

Overview

Historypin.com is a semantic web partnership between Google and the not for profit organization, We Are What We Do.

Historypin gives curators two ways to display photographs, in "Tours" and "Collections." Accord to the site, "Tours lead you step-by-step through a series of pieces of content, telling a story, exploring a place or walking through time." Use of content for tours is not limited to those uploaded by the user-- anyone can use any Historypin content to create a tour. The Tour function also allows users to fade between the historical picture and Google Earth images. Collections, on the other hand, center on themes or topics.

Users can search for photographs on the "Map" page by location, date, and subject tags. Historypin allows users to search tags, location, and date information. The "Map" also allows users to visual access through the use of thumbnails. Everything uploaded to Historypin by a user is added to the user's "Channel." For more information about Historypin, see the Collection page or visit Historypin.com.

Use of Historypin for Youth Access to Local Historical Photographs

The "Tours" feature will be utilized for this project.

Modification of some features is required to optimize youth (and general) access. Historypin's search is not easy to use. Though it seems you can search by subject tags, the search engine is either very slow or defective. Additionally, you cannot browse subject tags, making discovery beyond the use of location somewhat difficult. Finally, the descriptions of the photographs are unsearchable. The utility of a better search of tags and descriptions will be described in the Indexing section of this page. 

 

Describing Historic Photographs: A Theoretical Approach

Indexing Photographs

The main indexing concern is over the process of selecting appropriate subject terms to represent historic photographs. We chose a theoretical model: the Shatford/Panofsky for subject level classification since Stewart's research suggests a possible access gap from a lack of theoretical modelling among indexers.

Another lack identified in Stewart's research was the lack of abstract subject terms in indexing historical photographs. Indexers tended to use generic and specific terms over abstract terms. Stewart interprets this trend as one "conditioned by the positivist tradition of LIS," (321) which values objective description--or, description with as little subjective interpretation as possible. Additionally, he points out that "many indexers consider that the documentary photographs collected by their institutions do not contain abstract subjects," (317) or are photographs taken simply for documentary purposes. This assumes the photographer's intention as one of documentation (308). Essentially, Stewart seems to suggest that indexers "read" historical photographs in the way that would make them easiest to objectively index and does not take into account reasonable subjective meanings or the change of readings over time. Moreover, Stewart points out that these practices are upheld by Library of Congress guidelines (303)

Stewart reports that most indexers do not apply theoretical knowledge when determining the subject or "aboutness" of historical photographs (306). He suggests the use of Panofsky's model of specific, generic, and abstract subject description with the addition of Shatford's subject facets (301), known as the Shatford/Panofsky model. 

Though Collins' research suggests that generic and specific subject terms are most helpful in retrieving photographs, historical photographs include the abstraction of time and may be misrepresented as documents. If it were suggested, for example, that the picture of the Flat Iron Building was artistically taken, different information would be used for its description.

At the beginning of this project, while brainstorming ways of presenting a digitization of our collection, I had the idea to present the photographs as clues to a historical mystery, asking users to read them as a part of a larger story and not as discrete documents. Perhaps this was juvenille. My point was, when looking at historical photographs, especially if we are expected to feel a connection with their time and place, we wonder what the story is behind them, what values can be gleaned and if we can relate to them. In other words, indexing photographs as documents does not reflect their intended use for this project, which aims to bring local history to life for middle school age children. Therefore, we will apply the Shatford/Panofsky theoretical model in determining descriptive metadata. 

Sources:  

1. Collins, Karen. "Providing Subject Access To Images: A Study Of User Queries." American Archivist 61.1 (1998): 36-55. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40294073
2. Stewart, Brian. "Getting The Picture: An Exploratory Study Of Current Indexing Practices In Providing Subject Access To Historic Photographs." Canadian Journal Of Information & Library Sciences 34.3 (2010): 297-327.