CRT buries the digital archive

[Derek R.]

Using the CRT website is confusing. Whilst the home page can be accessed, and images viewed through the "Themes" portal, the "archives" whilst listed show nothing other than references to their numbers within the archives. There is no visual access to any of the items listed, which are a great many.

 

I'm viewing the website through Firefox, do I presume that other browsers are getting the same results?

[Laurence Hogg]

Using the CRT website is confusing. Whilst the home page can be accessed, and images viewed through the "Themes" portal, the "archives" whilst listed show nothing other than references to their numbers within the archives. There is no visual access to any of the items listed, which are a great many.

 

I'm viewing the website through Firefox, do I presume that other browsers are getting the same results?

Internet explorer seems to work OK although some pages have a "forbidden" warning on some parts.

[madcat]

It's too late for me too fall down the wormhole that is an archive but I will have to have a search through and see how easy it is for me to use. I'm not particularly good at computer stuff so if it's too hard / obscure I will fail to get anywhere.

 

I hope CRT continue to develop their digital archive .

[Derek R.]

OK, tried this in Chrome, and then again in Firefox, results the same.

 

Click on "archive" from the home page and you will get a list in alphabetical order.

Most of the documents are not visible as such, there are details of them only (presumably they are available on an arranged visit).

But choose "Arthur Watt Collection", or scroll down to "Photographic Collection" then from that sub-menu "Main Photographic Collection", and you will get further options for searching 5,581 images of what is claimed in total of 22,000 "historic images freely available to view". You've just got to dig around.

 

- Or, just punch into the search box what you are looking for.

Edited October 13, 2015 by Derek R.

[alan_fincher]

- Or, just punch into the search box what you are looking for.

The search facility is only as good as the information recorded against the images.

 

As this is very incomplete, and often totally erroneous, whilst you might strike lucky and find images that are relevant to your search, there is more than a distinct likelihood you will not find ALL images relevant to your search.

Edited October 13, 2015 by alan_fincher

[Machpoint005]

The search facility is only as good as the information recorded against the images.

 

As this is very incomplete, and often totally erroneous, whilst you might strike lucky and find images that are relevant to your search, there is more than a distinct likelihood you will not find ALL images relevant to your search.

 

...so what is needed is a knowledgeable volunteer prepared to spend the time it takes to index everything properly. The results will then be subject to human error.

I won't be volunteering.

[alan_fincher]

...so what is needed is a knowledgeable volunteer prepared to spend the time it takes to index everything properly. The results will then be subject to human error.

I won't be volunteering.

What is needed is that when you do send in additions and/or correctios somebody acts upon them.

 

I'm no longer trying.

[Machpoint005]

What is needed is that when you do send in additions and/or correctios somebody acts upon them.

 

I'm no longer trying.

 

...the point being, how does "somebody" know that the person sending in additions and corrections actually knows what they are on about?

[alan_fincher]

 

...the point being, how does "somebody" know that the person sending in additions and corrections actually knows what they are on about?

 

Yes this is a real difficulty, I agree.

 

However it is pointless to ask for corrections, and then to neither action them, or to respond to them in any way. I send supporting information if I attempt to get something corrected.

 

An example of a correction I sent is something identified as on the BCN, that clearly shows the distinctive bridge at Bulls Bridge at the start of the Paddington Arm. If they don't have people with the ability to compare to a modern picture, and correct the misinformation, then any attempt to caption or index seems likely to fail to me.

 

It should also be possible for them to realise if a picture features any boat carrying a British Transport Commission or British Waterways (Board) livery, then that picture could only have been taken from 1948 onwards, (or Photoshopped!).

[mayalld]

Some people have a talent for stepping into conversations they know little about. I have worked collecting material for years, much of which is within the CRT archive, yes I do think access is important and experts should be involved asap. I am sure Mr Myall in all the years and hours you have spent contributing to conservation and enrichment of our waterway heritage you would not disagree. Remind me again what it is that makes you so well educated on archival matters?

I don't disagree with the sentiment about material being available.

 

However, there is an approach that you could take so that people would take you seriously, and an approach that sees you dismissed as a ranted grinding an axe.

 

You lose the argument, not because you are wrong, but because you alienate the audience.

 

And as to my experience in the field;

 

Http://www.freebmd.org.uk/

[CheekyMonkey84]

Working for a museum with a massive transport archive we haven't put anything online yet. That's because the archive itself isn't in a suitable state. Years of it being 'managed' by volunteers mean the curators don't know exactly what's in there. If you manually go through the room of filing cabinets you can (eventually) find what you hope you're looking for as there is no list containing everything. This also assumes that things have been filed how you would expect and not according to whatever quirks the original person who filed it was using as a filing system. We started scanning just the photos 5 years ago and we have a tiny percentage done (this is done with volunteer labour or if you get one out you scan it while you're there).

From the other side of the table it seems they have put something together to show they have an archive, probably with very little (for the massive job and IT costs) money but as an example to show they've started. Using the bookmarked link I found what I expected: images with details in the 'Themes' bit, and 'we have this but haven't uploaded an image yet' through the search box. All in all I think it's a good start for a resource with a massive amount of content (presumably) and little staff hours or cash to dedicate to it. It would be hoped that over the years that this is added to as time and resource permit. I haven't seen an archivist/curator job advertised in our trade press recently (and if £50,000 was the budget this would eat up most of that) so presume it's managed by someone who is either on their own or doing another job at the same time (I may be wrong).

 

Either way I think it's a good start and the general public don't always realise what taking on such a massive project entails, especially as they always expect you to be at the best of cataloguing and digitisation, when they never get to see the reality of behind the scenes.

 

Stephanie

 

 

ETA: Most archivists/curators are hired on the skills and experience rather than their knowledge of what's in the collection. I'd guess that the person responsible can safely look after thousands of photographs but doesn't necessarily know what they're looking at. Even many people on here have never done the whole canal system and so you rely on the previous caretaker to have known what they were doing (see above) and to have labelled correctly. While in this forum its not specialist knowledge, in the outside world it is and won't be something that will be required of the person doing the job as it would leave you with a very tiny pool of applicants (if any). As to comparing one image to modern photos, that's a massive job - finding out where that picture was taken, then finding a modern photo and comparing, when you have limited knowledge of your subject is a massive job and can't practically be done when you're working on thousands of images (let alone trying to do the day job at the same time). As said above we rely on those who know more to tell us when we've got it wrong, we need it verifying, which can take time if you don't know the industry (ie canals) and don't know who to talk to (I would guess most archivists would contact CRT in this instance which puts them at a disadvantage). Think of it like editing Wikipedia. Someone writes it, then someone reads and trusts it, then the next person objects and edits it. You don't know person 3's intentions or background so you always take Wikipedia entries with a grain of salt as there isn't 'official' verification. I'd like to think though that the archivist will react to your email - just forget that museums/archives run on 'museum time' (similar to canal time) so it might take longer than expected to deal with!

 

(Wow that's a long post!)

Edited October 13, 2015 by CheekyMonkey84

[Derek R.]

A long post with a valid point. It takes quite a long time for me to find certain items within my shed - even when under my nose.

[CheekyMonkey84]

A long post with a valid point. It takes quite a long time for me to find certain items within my shed - even when under my nose.

And you probably put everything in there!

[RLWP]

<snip>

 

Stephanie

 

Now, do I take your post as an insight of the reality and complexity of archiving, or as a justification piece by another victim of CRT brainwashing?

 

Except, I have been involved in a highly competently run volunteer archive for many years now - it ain't easy! And we also haven't tried to put ours online.

 

I would hope that CRT have put the effort into constructing a database structure and the processes to populate it, and will use volunteers to actually do the data entry

 

Richard

Edited October 13, 2015 by RLWP

[Guest]

I don't disagree with the sentiment about material being available.

 

However, there is an approach that you could take so that people would take you seriously, and an approach that sees you dismissed as a ranted grinding an axe.

 

You lose the argument, not because you are wrong, but because you alienate the audience.

 

And as to my experience in the field;

 

Http://www.freebmd.org.uk/

Perhaps more correctly, he alienates SOME of the audience. I don't care, so he hasn't alienated me.

[AMModels]

I don't disagree with the sentiment about material being available.

 

However, there is an approach that you could take so that people would take you seriously, and an approach that sees you dismissed as a ranted grinding an axe.

 

You lose the argument, not because you are wrong, but because you alienate the audience.

 

And as to my experience in the field;

 

Http://www.freebmd.org.uk/

I use that site every week virtually, great to know one of the people behind it. Excellent work from all concerned, it is a great resource.

[Ian Mac]

People have written about corrections they have sent in and what happening.Well I have recently had a reply to those correction I sent in, asking for more details and better references to the page in error, when provided, the details have now been altered :-)

[alan_fincher]

People have written about corrections they have sent in and what happening.Well I have recently had a reply to those correction I sent in, asking for more details and better references to the page in error, when provided, the details have now been altered :-)

 

Well done for staying with it!