映像保存学会AMIA2016レポート（足立アン）/ AMIA 2016 Report by Ann Adachi-Tasch

前川氏のレポートに続き、2,016年11月にピッツバーグで行われた映像保存学会の様子をCCJの足立が今後のCCJのリサーチにアプライできる部分をノートしました。こちらは英語です。

Below are few points from the 2016 AMIA conference that may be helpful in thinking about CCJ's planning. 

---

ニューヨーク州、ロチェスター大学のマルチ・メディア・デジタル・アーカイブプロジェクトの紹介。
Thursday, 2pm
“Re-Envisioning Japan: Ephemeral Film Recuperation, Restoration, and Digital Curation”
“Re-Envisioning Japan: Japan as Destination in Visual and Material Culture” (REJ) is a multimedia and digital archive of tourism travel and educational ephemera documenting changing images of Japan and its place in the world in the early to mid 20th century. 

• The project required working with 3 Terabytes of video.

• Migrating to Omeka was easier in terms of interoperability with newer software and plugins.

• REST API allows for decouples or "headless" application that extend beyond the CMS

• Video output was ProRes 422 for 16mm & Super8

• OpenCV: Computer Vision and Image Processing for localized denoising and inpainting

• OpenImage IO for image processing. High level API (DPZ, Cineon, JPEG-2000)

• H264 pattent issue. Native browser video playback HTMLS5 video API

• ArchiveSpace to archive the website

---

Thursday, 4:45pm
“DAS: Case Study: Creating a Trove of Digital Assets”
In 2012 Facing History and Ourselves set out to fundamentally change its management and use of its media collections. In the past four years, this educational non-profit has done just that. Starting with inaccessible legacy media, inconsistent distribution mechanisms, and media management challenges, Facing History has successfully digitized its legacy media, established policies for born digital production, implemented and rolled out a DAM, established a taxonomy, and integrated with a web content management system and an online video platform. 

Notes

AV Preserve's services:

• Development of DAM RFP

• Support in vendor selection

• Support for digitization process

• Leading taxonomy development

• Configuration of the DAM

Process:

• Interviews (all stake holders: library, production team, end-user, senior leadership (strategic goals), IT)

• Document review

• System demonstrations

Documentation & Prioritization:

• Business requirements

• Use cases – different types of users, interactions, what is successful outcome?

• Functional requirement – individual detailed statements about functions from search, browse, cataloging, data entry, administration, user management, ingest

• Technical requirement – what are constraints. Application must be deployed on our site; it must be on the cloud; on cloud but on our cloud (not vendor); not built on java, no oracle, etc.

• Format requirements – file formats. List of formats (AV: format + encoding). What is expected to happen in this system. Need transcoding? Is this deliverable format? Project file: preservation object. Database file (xml). Core assets viewable, preview, proxy.

• Metadata requirements – More than library assets. Inventory, etc.

All this goes to RFP to vendors.  Overview, Requirements, Response Worksheets

Function requirement needs to connect to a user case so there’s context for the vendor about the function requirement we mean. 

Taxonomy development: enterprise taxonomy. Cross-institutional participation. Intended for website and DAMS. Needed vocabulary. 

Vendor: Orange Logic (CA and France)

Metadata: MARC record existed (library)
MARC wasn’t going to work for the new system. Turned into Cortex Record: Kept description, translated existing metadata into more user-friendly versions 

Rollout:

• Whet people’s appetites but don’t over-promise; let people name it (“trove”)

• Provide clear documentation – created user guide with screen shots.

• Training

• Rollout new features over time

• Governance document. Policies, all the players have to be documented and kept up to date. Who needs to approve what.

• Everyone who has stake in it has agreement in what we are doing. !!!!!!!!!!!!

---

アクセス提供を可能にするために著作権問題を乗り越えるストラテジーを紹介。ニューヨーク公共図書館やWGBH公共放送局からのケース・スタディーを紹介。
Friday, 11am
“Overcoming Rights Paralysis: Practical Approaches to Providing Access”
This session will provide insights from rights experts working within two leading organizations digitizing many thousands of hours of audiovisual content with accessibility as a primary goal. Presenters will include Greg Cram, Associate Director of Copyright and Information Policy at New York Public Library and Jay Fialkov, Deputy General Counsel at WGBH.

Notes

Rights database (rights metadata). No general standardized rights metadata schema. Usually in free text field, 

NYPL Director of Copyright
Greg Cram

• No general standardized rights metadata schema. Usually in free text field, maybe Dublin Core.

• Provenance. Donor restriction in the agreement. Facts relevant to copyright status, author name, author death date, publication, etc.

• Retract contract, license changes the copyright.

• Other IP: Trademarks, rights of pricvacy, trade secrets, rights of publicity.

• Track permitted uses. Need to tell NYPL digital platforms how the assets can be used. Outputted through APIs. Built its own. Ruby on rails. Descriptive, rights, etc. Accommodate risk analysis in the system.

• Publication is important in figuring out copyright status.

• Copyright status determinations → use the forms. Two staff process 400 items per day.

• Highres downloads for public domain material.

• “Undetermined” items. Posted on website after careful review.

• Photos, research the copyright holder. Unable to locate the rights holder. Determine the risk. 1.8 billion statutory damages potential. → Fairuse analysis. The risk was pretty small → accept that risks and digitized the photos.

• Created a website World Fair. App, top educational apps.

• Fair use → orphan works.

• Users are provided about data about those assets available so users can make decisions.

• DPLA, Europeana, CC.

• Rights Statements.org.

• Item pages, the rights statements logo.

• No database of public domain, URIs, APIs, allow others to create a database of public domain assets.

• NYPL thought they would push to flickr, but now users come to NYPL and extract out.

• AV: identify all the levels of rights.

• Music sound recording: one recording and one for compositions, two different copyright holders.

• Strengthen their fair use arguments.

• Tap into unique identifiers. Contacts and contracts, identify the person and their records.

• Automation can be used. Now it’s manual. Eventually would like to rely on descriptive data to automate. Automate some of the decision making.

• AV (AMI), same benefits of risk assessment for images will be available for moving image. Identify layers of copyright on moving image. Rights metadata.

• Understand the composition of descriptions to create analysis, workflow, etc.

Jay Fialkov WGBH

• American Archive of Public Broadcasting. CPB around 2007, work with library of congress. Footages from many broadcasters.

• Third party materials, works made under union or guild agreements, no paper trail

• Clips of Public Programs, had to get in touch with each’s producers.

• Unhurried view of copyright. “Publication without easy access would defeat the social purpose of copyright.” Whose rights do we respect the rights holder or the users?

• Can’t do for the 47,000 hours of content same thing for the short promo. No budget for clearances.

• In 2015 Rights Summit at WGBH, with LC+ Harvard Berkman Center. Peter Hurdle. “Copyright and Cultural Institutions” Free online.

• 2 days. Association of Research Libraries. What can you use, how to consider Fair Use. Google Books court ruled its fair use because the system itself had transformative use. Copyright law should support accessibility without harming people.

• Section 107 Fair Use

• 108 Library & Archives, make available in person in premises.

• Copyright provisions. Until-bootlegging. Criminal liability.

• Came up with plans (metadata). Get rights to the extent that they can. Public domain, make it accessible to everybody.

• Other materials get grant (CPB). Broader license from the stations.

• Deed of gift, the station gives you rights.

• Create buckets to identify different kinds of programs. Series. Which buckets are more likely to be more fair use. Which are more risky?

• Local station that is factual may be fair use.

• Others that have things that are not available elsewhere. Performance → if making it available online, may be risky.

• Made decisions for Online Reading Room (streaming).

• Third-party program. Iowa program about underage drinking. Looked into it, identified those on the shots. May be not good to put that online.

• Every two weeks, consulting: asses and measure with Berkman Center.

• WGBH owns content so they are sympathetic that people can’t use their material. They are also sympathetic for those who want to use it.

---

フィルムのビデオが混合されて制作された作品を今日どのように展示するべきか、作家ジャド・ヤルクットとナムジュン・パイクの作品の保存とデジタル方法を通して検証。（スライド41）
Friday, 4:45pm
“Ongoing Intermediations: Preserving Jud Yalkut and Nam June Paik” 
How do we best make sense of past hybrid media forms in the present? This panel, investigates theoretical and practical approaches to understanding and preserving the moving image through the work of pioneering media artists and frequent collaborators Jud Yalkut (1938-2013) and Nam June Paik (1932-2006).

Notes

Jon Dieringer
Screen Slate/Electronic Arts Intermix

• Un-editioned distribution as a form of access. Edition: Art market model of scarcity

• Long term “sales” to archives and institutions are based on non-transferrable license agreements → think about what is life of work (files, not tapes)

• Non exclusive rights to distribute

• New strategies for approaching preservation and promoting access of films on video

• In the 90s many artists began to circulate their films on video. Nauman, Acconci, Baldessari, Jonas, Schneemann.

• Why show films on video? Increasing representation of artist films in gallery shows in which film loopers/prints are unaffordable or infeasible. Access for educational and research use.

• Screenings in microcinemas, small non-theatrical, or non-institutional contexts

• Reasons to revisit film transfers

• Progressive image (no interlacing)

• Proper framerate: no 3:2 pull down

• Affordable, high quality projectors

• NFPF avant-garde masters grant in collaboration with New York University's Fales Library for Tommy Turner’s Super8mm

• Collaboration with Anthology Film Archive for Carolee Schneemann's Fuses and Joan Jonas’ Songdelay & Wind, successfully applied to grant.

• Intermedia: Dick Higgins then Gene Youngblood’s Expanded Cinema

• Jud Yalkut’s Video Films are hybrid. Video, CRT monitors, finished on film

• 1971 interview with Yalkut. Woodstock shots on portapak and transferred to film. Video is becoming dominant, have to affix the two. Define each other by their interaction. Video is good for sound.

• By interfacing them we can go to the essence of the medium.

• 2013 Jud Yalkut passed away and films were donated to AFA. Video to EAI.

• Master material. Outtakes. Everything. Solo works, collaborations.

• Video Film Concert 1971. (with Nam June Paik)

• People know it by video since it was distributed by EAI. But it was a film work.

• Videotape Study No. 3 (1967-69). Made with video recorder, then filmed it. Preservation: 16mm BW Reversal Original – 16mm BW Dupe Negative (liquid gate)(3234) – 16mm BW positive prints (3303)

• Cinema Metaphysique No. 5 (1967-72). Preservation: 16mm color reversal original – 16mm color internegative (3273) – 16mm color positive print (3383).