The act of digitization has implications for both how we experience an object aesthetically and what kind of information we can gather from an analysis of that object. The kitchen item digitization project spoke very effectively to the former, as one example. Uploading pictures and 3D visualizations of an orange (despite being a rather mundane object) drove home the realization that we use all of our senses to interpret an object, not just our sight. Thus, what is lost when digitizing is the way in which an object acts upon our other senses. Yet, our vision can still activate our other senses, and high-quality digitization should involve consideration of how well the newly-created image captures features which engage our sense of smell, taste, hearing and touch. In the case of the orange, I wanted to ensure that the 3D visualization adequately rendered the small speck on the fruit that looked like it was beginning to rot. This gives the viewer a sense of its taste even without it being physically there to bite.
Many of the benefits of digitization as described in the readings — such as OCR software allowing for searchable documents (
Terras 2) and greater accessibility/viewability (
Drucker 164) — seemed fairly self-evident (though this could be my own generational bias which causes me to take these benefits for granted). Admittedly, I found
Terras‘ and Drucker’s discussions of the drawbacks to digitization to be more compelling and surprising, as they were points which I had not considered previously. Drucker’s assertion that digitization can separate an object from its cultural context resonated with me (166-167); in conjunction with her later example of the Caligula statue, the point made me reflect on a course I took last fall on Roman art in the Augustan period. Several times during that class, the professor stressed the importance of context when analyzing archaeological finds. Just as important as the object itself is its findspot relative to other objects. This is perhaps the most critical aspect of an object’s cultural significance that can be obscured or lost when only engaging with it digitally. This, along with Terras’ reminder that a digital collection is a result of deliberate choices of inclusion/exclusion which can contain bias (259), should not stop us from relying on digital materials but rather force us to engage them more critically.
One very crucial, yet sometimes overlooked, aspect of digital humanities scholarship is adherence to copyright law. While most researchers and scholars understand how to conduct proper attribution and citation in a traditional written research project, digital humanities projects often involve a wider range of audiovisual material which complicates this process by implicating lesser-known aspects of copyright law. Below is a brief guide which should hopefully assist those seeking to perform due diligence in regard to copyright when putting together their projects:
- When browsing a digital collection, locate the copyright and terms of use information for the collection/organization/site as a whole before attempting to find copyright information for specific pages or objects on the site.
- While the location of copyright information can vary widely by site, in many cases, you will want to look for pages such as “About,” “Policies,” “Legal Notices” or “Resources.”
- Terms of Use/Service pages will most often be found at the bottom of each site page as part of a lower menu bar (usually accompanied by Accessibility, Contact Us, etc.)
- The copyright information or terms of use for the site may provide a blanket policy for material on the site or may state that the copyright status of each object varies. You should also note whether the Terms of Use are intended to be legally binding or are meant to serve as guidelines. For example, you are not legally required to attribute a work that is in the public domain; however, a site may request in its Terms of Use that you still attribute the work nonetheless as a courtesy.
- Full copyright protections – The strictest terms of use include full copyright protection for the material. Unless covered under fair use (see below), the material cannot be used on your project without formal written consent from the copyright holder.
- Fair use exceptions include non-commercial use (such as for educational purposes), transforming or commenting on the material in some way, or only using a small, non-essential element of the work. Franky Abbott from Digital Public Library of America provides a great overview of the concept of fair use along with a helpful visual (start at 32:35).
- Creative Commons licensed – These are works whose copyright protections have not expired but the creator has allowed for reuse within certain parameters. Look for specific acronyms to determine how this material can be used. In some cases, you may freely reuse as long as you attribute to the original creator (BY). You may also see ShareAlike (SA) which tells the user of the material that they must reuse under the same license as the original, no stricter and no more lenient.
- Public Domain – A work in the public domain no longer has copyright protections and can be used freely in a digital humanities project. This could be a result of expiration or the creator’s choice to release their work into the public domain. It is important to determine whether the work is published or unpublished, as this distinction can determine when the copyright expires.
Digital humanities issues, tools, and resources