Cultural Heritage & Data (afternoon session)

Cultural Heritage & Data (afternoon session)


>>From the Library of
Congress in Washington, DC.>>So welcome back to the afternoon. Thank you all for coming
back so promptly and it’s with much pleasure I hand over to
Tom Learner to introduce the panel. Tom Learner, as you all
know, is the Head of Science at the Getty Conservation Institute
and we always joke about the fact that we usually have to go out
of the country to see each other so I will hand over to Tom
to introduce our panel.>>Thank you, Fenella. We’re missing one speaker,
who are we missing? Oh, here we go. I’m going to keep my comments
very, very brief because we ran over slightly this morning and we
have four fantastic speakers now, each with 20 minutes so I don’t want
to eat anything into that at all. The bios for each speaker
are in your pack. This is a pretty impressive panel in
case you haven’t figured this out. I was going to say four
heavyweights from Europe. I don’t want to use that
term in any sort of mean way but if these were people applying for the European Council Research
Grants these would be the advanced level, four very, very established
figures in the European side of the conservation science so I
believe Michel you’re up first. I’d like to welcome Michel Menu
from the [inaudible] in Paris.>>I will move closer to you. So access is the principle aim of the integrated infrastructure
initiative which is [inaudible] so as Luca said it’s service
given to the community in order to get access to cutting
edge facilities and [inaudible] based system
installed inside the Louvre Museum in Paris, was at the
beginning of this [inaudible] after the first European project
called [inaudible] was the only fixed lab facility. Building the theory of one message
I wanted to emphasize and to point out after Luca is that
this opportunity we built with Bruno Brunetti and Antonio
Sgamellotti at the beginning, it is the development
of this theory of icubes and LabTech was a networking project
[inaudible] enables us to have in the future a permanent
infrastructure and the other thing I
have to emphasize is that it’s [inaudible] what is
difficult to give a definition for that is heritage science is
natural science follows cultural heritage and also the data process. So FIXLAB is inside IPERION now,
given by four facilities and, two in Hungary, one is in
Debrecen, one is in Budapest and two in France, Aglae inside
the Louvre Palace and SOLEIL is Synchrotron
in Paris, near Paris. I will first of all describe
the four facilities in brief and give some highlights which have
been achieved during [inaudible]. The purpose of FIXLAB is to
give access to large facilities. Access is provided by complementary
nondestructive instrumentation which gives barely not visible
but elemental, structural and chemical analysis and with
the neutron project I will show that we are able also
to do some imaging. First, the first facility in
Hungary is Atomki in Debrecen. There’s access to iron
beam techniques through Van de Graff
particle accelerator and Zita [inaudible]
is the coordinator, the head of this project, the access
for cultural help so in brief, IBA is a set of different techniques which are energetic particles
inducing several excitations of atoms and gives clues in order
to have a total elemental analysis with [inaudible] which maybe you are
more familiar with x-ray fluoresce, it’s almost the same and for
the light elements [inaudible] for instance you can use
the nuclear reactions. You may have also analysis
information in depth from the first micrometers
from the surface. In Atomki, they have a nuclear
micro problem that means in vacuum, they can have a beam spot of
one micrometer in diameter and can get elemental maps or
a concentration at this stage but an external microbeam is
also available with about 20, 30 micrometers in diameter because
you have a spread of diffusion of the beam and you may analyze
directly the object without putting in vacuum, without any preparation. That’s the team, Zika is here
and we know the IPERION community and know her and also
her colleagues here. The second facility is Budapest
Neutron Center associated with the Wigner Center and it’s
based on the nuclear neutron reactor and gives several techniques
I will show now. The neutrons are used
for elemental analysis. You may get this kind of analysis. You can also achieve structural
studies with neutron defraction or small angle neutron
scattering and also with the neutrons it’s
used for imaging. This example is given for an
Egyptian jar and the imaging with neutrons of this jar
was most interesting in order to understand what the
content of the jar was. That’s the team. The head of the project
is [inaudible], the BND welcome desk is [inaudible] and also [inaudible] is the
coordinator of the access to BNC. The third facility is SOLEIL, it’s a
synchrotron of the third generation which has been implemented
a few years ago south of Paris in Gif-sur-Yvette. Among 20 beam lights, about
11 beamlines can be used for [inaudible]. These are the applications
you may get. Frederique [inaudible] is
the leader for IPERION, the task leader for SOLEIL. You may have tomography
beamlines at SOLEIL with ANATOMIX, PSICHE, and PUMA. I will come back to PUMA
a little bit later on and give some information with if you increase the resolution
you decrease the energy and so on. You have also microbeam
lines at SOLEIL. You have five beam
lines which can be used for cultural heritage purposes. What is also said is that this
project is enhanced not only on cultural heritage
artifacts per se but also with paleontological artifacts. PUMA is the beamline which is
photons utilizes materiaux anciens, it’s an acronym and it has been
optimized for ancient materials so that means cultural and
paleontological materials and 60 percent of the beamtime will
be allocated for ancient materials so the description of PUMA and this
beamline, which develops ongoing at the moment will be open
in about a year from now. That’s the team SOLEIL, more
than 300 people so it’s headed by [inaudible] and
[inaudible] is somewhere here. He’s barely visible
but Frederick is here. AGLAE in my laboratory and a long
time ago I installed this machine and at the moment it’s stopped
for renewing and for new, to be completely transformed
and to be completely automatized to give better service to the people
and so it’s a tandem accelerator. It’s an American tandem accelerator
from Middleton Wisconsin Medicine and this is the only accelerator which is 100 percent
devoted to cultural heritage. Claire [inaudible] who is here,
is now the leader of the group with three other engineers
[inaudible]. So now, for the recent
application and some highlights. The first highlight was sent
to me by Atomki and by Zita. They analyzed glass weights in order
to answer to detailed composition of this glass weights
of the [inaudible]. Identification of the traces and the
other colors and in order to look at the technology and
at the same time, the same Portuguese team sent
medieval glass from a site in Italy and here are the samples
which are embedded in resin and the questions are almost the
same composition characterization and also the understanding of
the alteration of the glass. Another highlight has been given
to me by the Budapest Nation Center and they analyzed by Daniella
DeMartino [assumed spelling] some artifacts from the Milano Cathedral
and they analyzed and wanted to understand the deterioration
of [inaudible] which strengthens the
architecture of the cathedral. You have to trust me about
it because that’s deep into, it’s not bright enough but here
you have cracks which are visible by the naked eye but others are
not invisible and has been revealed to light with the neutron tomography and even cracks considerably weaken
the strength of the materials and it was interesting for
the architects in order to restore the cathedral. Another example briefly
concerns this processional cross with the same applicant
Daniella DeMartino, from an abbey in Italy close
to Milano and the results of that was used not
only gamma activation but also some XRF x-ray
fluorescence and other techniques. It’s a silver cross which is gilded
and they will be able to confirm through the presence of
mercury the amalgam technique. The last highlight I
wanted to present is one which has been achieved
in my laboratory, the Medieval Kashi project. It’s a lustered ceramics from Iran
and this map shows the invention of the lustered ceramics in
Mesopotamia in the eighth century of the Christ and this
technique spread all over the Mediterranean
basin to arrive in Italy during the renaissance
period so Egypt, Madrid, Spain, and this technique
continued at the same time. This object is so valuable but
like this, you are not allowed to sample them and so ion beam
techniques are very interesting in order to show how
the stratification of the lustre has been
achieved during this time and so we have this
technique called [inaudible] by scattering spectrometry and through processing the spectra
you may analyze the different thickness of the lustre proper which
is small metallic nano particles which are embedded inside the glaze
of the ceramics and processing that, you may achieve the thickness of
the coating of nano particles, the thickness of the glaze, and how deep are these nano
particles embedded inside the glaze. And so, you can achieve through that
this stratography and the glaze, the lustre, the glaze
again, and the ceramic body. So thank you for your attention. [ Applause ]>>Thank you Michel. We’ll get through the
four presentations and then there will be a Q&A
answer session at the end. Our second speaker will be
speaking about the second of the three services
under IPERION’s CH dealing with transnational
access so you just heard about the FIXLAB work package. Antonio Sgamellotti,
Professor Emeritus from Universita di
Perugia will now talk us through the MOLAB work package
looking at mobile laboratories.>>Thank you very much so I will
speak about the mobile laboratory and archives in IPERION CH and
we start with the archives. Archives were introduced in the
last project in CHARISMA [phonetic] and it was a very successful
platform. It’s the access to the
archive or European museum in cultural heritage institution. We started with six institutions,
The National Gallery in London, the Opificio delle
Pietre Dure in Florence, the Centre de Recherche et
de Restauration in Paris, the British Museum in London, the
Museo Nacional del Prado in Madrid and the Cultural Heritage
Agency of the Netherlands. In IPERION, there was an increase of
the institution giving the service. We now have the Instituto
del Cultural de Madrid, the Centre for Art Technological
Studies and Conservation of Copenhagen, the
Rathgen Museum in Berlin and the Instituut Royaal du
Patrimoine artistique in Brussel. This is a physical assess,
it’s not a visual assess. The archive contains
a lot of documentation but not just documentation, also
samples, also cross sections and so on and so forth and those
are in different sizes, in different nations so
some examples for instance, in Opificio della Pietre
Dure you get a lot of information concerning Rafael
data, cross sections refractography. In the British museum you get
information about the technique of old statue as in ancient times
and then you get cross section, then you have a spectra, then you
have map so a lot of documentation which can be very, very useful. Useful to whom? To each other, you are always
the chairperson [laughter]. Useful to whom? To researchers, that they want to
collect information for instance on paintings, on the material,
colors, support, stratigraphy and composition of grounds. Art historians or archaeologists
what want to carry on provenance studies
on different techniques, conservators and scientists. It’s not working properly
but it doesn’t matter, there were some examples
for instance one researcher from Czechoslovakia went to
the Opificio della Pietre Dure to study the ground of
the 16th century painting and there was a lot of information. This is a typical case. This is the [inaudible]
the famous [inaudible]. It’s a tryptic but the three parts
are in three different museums in Florence in [inaudible], in
the National Gallery in London and the other one is in
Louvre, of course [laughter]. I always say [inaudible]. This was a case of a researcher on
this triptych and the best way was to go to the archives of these three
important institutions where a lot of information is present. In this you’ll see some of the
people working in Madrid, in London, and in Paris in a very
relaxed atmosphere and also the environment
is very pleasant also. Now let’s go to the mobile
laboratory which together with the FIXLAB was the
first infrastructure in the European project [inaudible]
just these two infrastructures and then you see things are going
to increase according to the needs of the cultural heritage community. In the previous CHARISMA, we had just two providers
[inaudible] Perugia and the Florence CNR and then
the Universita di Perugia and very recently also
a regional laboratory in [inaudible] joined
to this joint project. And then the CNRS in Paris, these were the two
provides in the previous. Now we have some more providers,
FORTH Foundation for Research and Technology in Hellas, Heraklion,
The Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun in Poland and the
Aachen University in Germany. Which are the users? The user conservator-restorers,
who carry out research on innovative methods in
restoration and preservation just to make an example,
conservation scientists who want to integrate their
measurements by micro-sampling with non-invasive investigations
and of course art historians and archaeologists who want to study
execution techniques in painting, ceramics, sculpture
and a lot of art works. A few examples, this is a study
that was done by the MOLAB and the title was [inaudible]
studies on the last judgment, which is [inaudible] and is in
the [inaudible] museum in Poland. What was the aim of the project? It was to study changes in
design, details in the composition, stages of under-drawing, different
characters of paint layers in order to identify material,
technique, and also the artist because probably it’s not
just [inaudible] is present in these big paintings and
the [inaudible] of the Academy of Fine Arts in [inaudible]. I just want to point upon an
important which is in accord to the European rules
[inaudible] in the data, the intellectual properties
of the results according to the European rules
belong to the users. They do not belong to the MOLAB
operators but to the users. Very often at the end
there is a collaboration and very often there is
a common publication. That was a very, in a way, long project because three MOLAB
facilities were involved, CNR, the Universita di Perugia and the
CNRS for 15 days of in situ access. Usually the intervention
lasts five days and you spend a lot
of time traveling. I want to say that in the last
12 years, we have been traveling for more than 200,000 kilometers
in Euro which is quite a lot. Fifteen days, because there were
three different MOLAB facilities operating with 10 MOLAB
operatos, four users, and sis non-invasive instruments. Which are here, XRF, mid and near
infrared, UV visible spectroscopy, XRD, multi-spectral scanning. This is the MOLAB working. Fortunately, there were three
separate parts of the tryptic so they were able to
work at the same time on the three different parts
and we got a lot of results. I just want to show some of them. For instance, using FTIR
and also XRD and I want to stress the importance
to use different techniques to get some useful results. In the gem of St. Michael’s
there is pure lazurite while in the blue dress of Mary
there is lazurite and lazurite with little amount of diopside and
azurite in the [inaudible] while in the reflection of the blue dress
from this piece there is azurite. The infrared didn’t have
good results on this case but we were able to get interesting
results using the refractions. For instance, we were able to
detect the lead tin yellow type I, the cinnabar, the [inaudible]
hydrocerussite and cerussite and also using UV visible
[inaudible]. Very, very interesting were
the results with the reflector. Some results were already known this
is for instance the visible light and this is the x-ray ready
made by the user in Warsaw and also there was some
refractograpy made but look at the difference in how you can see
the details using the refractography of the [inaudible] CNR in Florence. You can see easily all
the details and according to these results it’s
probably the [inaudible]. Research is still in
progress from this one. All this results were reported, one
of the chapters of Science and Art, the Painted Surface by the Royal
Society of London, of which I am one of the [inaudible] together
with my colleague [inaudible]. And as you can see, this
is a joint publication between the user [inaudible] and
the MOLAB operator [inaudible]. Passing from the previous CHARISMA to the [inaudible] there was
also an increase of technique. We already had point
chemical analysis but we include more other techniques
like multi/hyper spectral imaging and the visible near
and far infrared and also x-ray fluorescence
scanning including 3D surface and volume image which
were implemented in the joint research activity
of the previous project. There is a strong connection
between the joint research activity which has the mission to improve
the facilities in the MOLAB so they implement new
instrumentation and once they were tested and
they are well functioning, they became part of the MOLAB so there is just a few
examples [inaudible]. You see, this is a
collaboration with the [inaudible]. This painting of the 15th century
was completely black probably due to fire in the chapel and it was
almost impossible to read but look through mapping, the different
elements lead, copper, alum, gold and iron, you can see easily
and so you can be a good guy in the restoration process. Spectral imaging, this is some
of the work that University of Perugia did in which
it was possible apart from the lead [inaudible] to
detect some important pigments like [inaudible] in red,
emerald green which is in green and aquamarine, which is in blue. Then, from the fourth digital
[inaudible] it was used to reveal in situ detachments,
cracks and other defects. The purpose was the examination
of 19th century ceiling to assess detachment and
cracks through the defect map, risk map comparison
with conservators maps. This is a mobile single site
[inaudible] provided by [inaudible] and you can get information
about the depth profiling of hydrogen containing
materials in stone, mortar, paintings and so forth. [Inaudible] tomography provided
by Torun in Poland for examination of layered structures in easel
paintings and this is a project in collaboration with the
Opificio della Pietre Dure under Leonardo and that’s all. The next call is coming
soon the 15th of February. Usually there are two calls which
are 15th of September and 15th of February so if you
are interested, the call is almost
ready to be announced. Thank you very much. [ Applause ]>>Thank you Antonio, and I
know there’ll be some questions about submitting samples
and projects for these things when we got to Q&A. Our third speaker is Jorgen Wadum,
who seems to be Director of many, many places in Copenhagen but the
quickest way is perhaps to talk about the new Center for
Art Technological Studies and Conservation called CATS,
and Jorgen is going to be talking about the corporation networking
side of IPERION CH so Jorgen.>>Thank you very much. Well, you introduced the whole
gang up here as being very old and mature consortium and true
you are of course however, CATS, which is a small national research
infrastructure comprising the National Museum of Denmark,
the National Gallery of Denmark with which I’m working, and
the training school facilities at the Royal Academy of Fine
Arts Training for Conservators, we only joined this group of
excellent researchers very recently when IPERION was established, after all the other preparatory
research infrastructures so we are entirely new in this but
never the less, we have been tasked with the task of facilitating
a corporation and networking internally
within IPERION and also to reach out to users and users
outside IPERION in order to promote European cultural
heritage science and we are of course, as you can see on the
slide, and which you will have on the website of this
institute afterwards, we wanted to foster
cooperation and action with heritage science communities, all users of the transnational
access points that we just heard about, and potential scientific
industrial partners. We also want to address more widely
the multidisciplinary researchers and stakeholder’s concerns with
this research area including both conservators but also curators,
historians, archaeologists and whoever is working with
cultural heritage optics also within as I said, industry
or institutions or small and medium sized enterprises. The specific objectives are
many and you can see them here. It’s focused on high level
advocacy of the expert meetings, we want to make hands on workshops,
I’m going to mention a few in a moment, seminars, and
to disseminate this as widely as possible and hopefully to
engage as many of you as possible in the audiences when they
are open for everybody but we also organize
more internal workshops where it is the IPERION
partners that collaborate with maybe a few stakeholders that
we take in to be operating not within a vacuum but within still
the surrounding environment. We also want to carry out a number
of best practices and protocols to develop this to publish them
for all of you and to carry out foresight studies
as you can see in order to identify future
research priorities, what we heard about earlier today and opportunities for
innovation in this. You can see the acronyms CATS,
and CNR, and ND and [inaudible], they are the institutions
that are in charge of these individual projects
within work packets nine. What we are doing in CATS
is trying to take care of the knowledge exchange
activities, establishing these best practice
protocols together with the CNR so Susanna Bracci, who is not
here and with Marika Spring, representing the National
Gallery we worked on these foresight studies I
just mentioned and Erik Buelinckx from KIK-IRPA will work on
creating digital data management and procedures for this. This will start later on in the
project and we do not have much to share on this from my
side at this very moment. We have a lot of deliverables
that we want to share that will be visible on our website
and eventually published also on other media, reports and surveys,
analytical data expectations, we have recommendations of best
practice etc. We have a whole range of deliverables that you can see on
the IPERION home page and they go. We are supposed to have a very
busy four years of research and presentations as you can see. Well, some of these activities
have taken place of course. We have had an International
Conference on Glazed Ceramics in Architectural Heritage which was
the first conference we organized within the current IPERION network
and the aim of this conference was to discuss [inaudible] and other
architectural glaze ceramics of historic interest
manufactured and applied anywhere that they may have been, their
characteristics, the decay, and the conservation of
these kinds of objects. It was a conference that
was attended by 81 delegates from a lot of different countries. Well, that was the top one. The second one was
more internal workshop with just a few stakeholders from outside the
conservation/restoration community of the Netherlands, Cleaning of
Paintings and Protection of Metals. It was a workshop organized by
[inaudible] from the [inaudible] in Amsterdam in collaboration also with a joint project initiative
research project called CMOP which is an abbreviation of
Cleaning of Modern Oil Paints, which is a consortium between the
University of Amsterdam, the Tate, the Getty, and a number of
other partners that work on identifying safe cleaning
of modern oil paints. Again, there’s a relationship
with [inaudible], which is another project
running until 2018 actually. It is [inaudible] who is
sitting here in the auditorium who is the project leader of
this project about the cleaning of modern oil paints but
the workshop there was more of internal character
defining what kind of practice and projects would be most relevant. Another project was Investigating
Heritage Material with Safer Ion and Photon Beam Experiments. It took place as a collaboration
between the [inaudible] in Paris and the meeting was also there, attended by a huge
crowd 40 participants and 30 guests from aound the world. Eighteen countries were represented
and the program included a part from [inaudible] presenting also
recent advances, also round tables, [inaudible] and open sessions for
the people attending this meeting. In Copenhagen, organized in
collaboration between the Prado and the National Gallery in London, CATS hosted a workshop called
Preparation for Painting, Grounds and Primings in European
Paintings 1500 to 1800, and this was a workshop, which
is operating very closely with workshop eight, which is led
by Joe Padfield and Marika Spring from the National Gallery. You will hear more about this
from Joe in a while, I’m sure. quantities of data like
cross-sections that we have heard about in the previous
speaker will lie in archives and be accessible via arts lab
but if we could digitize them and put them online, we could
share them with the world and you could share
yours with us probably. So, the idea is to create a
Europe-wide scale collaborative development between
conservation science and digital documentation
specialists to more efficient access to cross-sectional data,
improved data comparability across the consortium. You may imagine that photographs
are cross-sections made in one lab with one set of filters
are difficult to compare with cross sections of the same
artist materials in another lab with a different set of filters,
although we call them the same type of either UV or natural
light, whatever. We hope to come up with
suggestions for this over the course of the IPERION research area. We also had a conference where we
were studying European Visual Arts 1800 to 1850, hosted
by CATS in Copenhagen and this was a technical art
history conference because we tried to bridge conservation science to the hardcore humanities art
historians and they are not, some art historians fall asleep when
they see cross section number three and scientists may do the same when they see I don’t know how
many images of something that they, but we want to bridge this and
make questions and maybe try to see if what we call technical art
history is actually not just art history as it was in the past
with an added scientific value of the analytical data that science
can produce for the understanding of cultural heritage
objects in general. So we’re studying this over two
days and we have participants also from the US in this conference and then we’ve just had our
first doctoral summer school, advanced characterization of
techniques, diagnostic tools, evaluation of methods
in heritage science. It took place in Madrid and was
organized by the IPERION in Spain. This doctoral summer school
will provide advanced lectures on analytical and diagnostic
tools for students and the lectures were
including up to date development in conservation materials
and recent advances of all the aspects you would need
to be put in front of in order to go out and work in our sector and there
were 30 students attending this summer school, also from
14 different countries within the European community. Forthcoming meetings Intangibility
Matters is an international conference that the LNEC in Lisbon
is organizing in May ’17, two days, which will look at the immaterial
sides of tangible cultural heritage and discuss all sorts of
aspects related to the values and reflections, etc. Keep an
eye out for the announcements for this conference, I bet it’s
going to be very interesting for those working with
intangible matters. There will also be a
joint project initiative, so next conference taking place
two days after in Beja in June, also working in that
same direction and trying to investigate objects
of that nature. The ion bean photon workshop was
so popular that the members wanted to have another one so another one
also is popping up in ’17 in June. It will be taking place in
Amsterdam and organized by the ICN in collaboration with NICAS and
other partners so keep an eye out for that for those
of you who are interested in these kind of workshops. And then finally, there will be
an international conference called Tempera between 1850 and 1950,
a painting technique at the dawn of modernity which will be held
at the Doerner Institute in Munich and it has to do with
in recent years a new and profound attempt was made to
explore the complex research field of tempera painting in the
19th and 20th century which has until now only been very
briefly discussed in literature. We want to organize here a two
day program which also will look at the sources of the
studio practice, materiality and of course the art
historical aspects of why is tempera painting having
a revival at that particular moment and how can that assist us in
understanding you could say, the bigger picture of the moment,
the interaction of technology and aesthetics in painting
of that particular period. There will soon here in December
be a call for contributions to this conference so keep
an eye out for this too. Well, drawing into other
work packages then the one that CATS is particularly in
charge of is a work package her on establishing cross disciplinary
best practices and protocols. Susanna Bracci had
been making a survey and had asked colleagues primarily
in the European community to reflect on best practices within analysis
and treatment of a variety of objects and materials that we
encounter in our cultural heritage at [inaudible] and this report
will be coming out pretty soon and will be the basis for
further research within IPERION such as the foresight studies
and best practices and protocols but mainly the foresight studies
and as I’m mentioning here, which is aiming at exploring
the idea within IPERION not to replicate what’s
already been done elsewhere in the development
heritage science strategies but to consider the question
from the point of view of developing strategies that support the research
infrastructures examining what instruments and tools
might be needed to address the research priorities
being identified by the group and where and how these are
needed to fill the gaps. This work is also ongoing and we have research results
coming out as they emerge. There will also be a course
planned in November ’17 in London and combined with the second
user meeting taking advantage of the presence of an audience
of stakeholders in London. The date has been chosen to immediately precede another
planned IPERION workshop activity, a colloquium on 3D imaging to
be held at the British Museum on the 10th of November,
2017 so you’re well ahead and can start saving up
for the travels and we hope that you’ll draw a lot of
participants from also this country. Leading up to the speakers of
tomorrow also, we have a work packet or task in the work packet
networking and external cooperation on heritage digital data management
exploitation use and reuse. It’s a very long title for this and
it is Erik Buelinckx from KIK-IRPA in Brussels who is coordinating
this and I should say it’s earlier, the project is beginning to form
itself now and in the beginning of ’17, a first survey will be
carried out within this network to identify and gather all relevant
information regarding the task. The main point of interest will be to define a broader
network also outside IPERION and to see how the
questions will be geared there to involve DARIAH-ERIC
and other stakeholders. Sharing data is something
that some fields in the humanities are not
very good at I daresay. Others are very good at them. I believe that conservation science and conservators are
sharing quite a lot however, there are still elements
within research data that are not being shared. Let me just mention one,
dendrochronological data. That is kept very strict
to the people who do this. Maybe we should discuss how that
could change for the benefit of the entire field and the
cultural heritage objects, where you can combine of
course, knowledge about climate, heritage objects, either
electronics, paintings, sculptures, archaeological wood and everything
comes together there and can be of huge importance for the field. So having said all this and having
showed you two slides very quickly here that you haven’t
got time to read, I think I will simply just
say thank you and keep up for the slides you will
get, and I hope that many of you will join the
network activities that we organized within IPERION. Thank you very much. [ Applause ]>>Thank you Jorgen and thank you
actually for all three speakers so far for being very punctual
and in fact a little bit early. We’re catching some time
up so no pressure Georgios. You have to no let us down. Our final speaker,
Georgios Karagiannis. He’s behind me right, yes,
the Scientific Internal Head from the Diagnosis Centre
of the Ormylia Foundation in northern Greece and he’ll
be talking about the knowledge and innovation technology transfer
research going on in IPERION CH.>>Thank you very much
for being here. I’m going to talk about knowledge
innovation and technology transfer in IPERION project, which is a
rather difficult lecture actually. Since our cultural heritage is
our common memory and knowledge as human beings, one of the main
concerns should be the cultivation of the current and next generations. We do believe that and
so UNESCO guidelines and documents are indeed fostering
consciousness of our culture through the cultivation of the
current and the next generations. All this is in accordance
with UNESCO. Also, the technological
development and the living data of the technological development so our endeavor should
also focus the cultivaion of the next generation towards
the cultivated use of technology. I would say that technology and
culture are things that go together but technology, as you know, is a
Greek word related to the techni which is art and which is also the
craft creation actually and the term of logos which is actually
our wisdom finally, and finally our spiritual heritage. IPERION project is not far
away from this main idea and this main target I would say, because we are using IPERION
various different kind of radiations and state of the art prototypes in
order actually to make endoscopy of an object and search the
deepest information of these and the deepest hidden
beauty of the art objects which is actually providing
us the possibility to create new cultural richness. This is very important
because the self-consciousness that we are achieving using the
results of the analysis is more or less an exercise about
our self-consciousness, according to Socrates,
which means [inaudible] and this is a great
power actually in order to create a new heritage
and a new art. Well, within this vision I would
say that now as you have seen in the morning and
from other presenters, we have accumulated knowledge
within this series of projects which actually LabsTech was
initiated in some initial discussion of [inaudible] based on a
previous existing network. Again, something started
again from Greece here and of course this accumulated
knowledge is enriched using these access actions and by acces actions
we are gaining advanced knowledge because we are not
providing our analysis only, but we are gaining much
knowledge from the users. Michel and Antonio talked
about these actions before. I would say that the knowledge and
the innovation that we are gaining within these projects and actually
in IPERION project is mainly based on transnational access and
the joint research activities that are main pillars
of the project. I would say that now, Professor
Antonio Sgamellotti we are in the position to say that
we have a new heritage. It’s not only the heritage of
the data that we have acquired from cultural heritage objects
but it’s also the creators of the technology platform
that we have and this technological platform
provides us the possibility o have this osmosis between the communities
of the technology provides, the chemistry, physics, and
engineers with art historians and the conservators and this is
now made practice so I would name that this is a blessing and
finally a blossom of a new science. This is my dimension
about heritage science and of course the incarnation
of innovation in IPERION project is mainly based
on the diagnostic instruments which we are going to talk
tomorrow about, diagnostic methods, and the data that we are producing. These are the three actions that
you have been presented before. So what are we offering? We are in the position to
make analysis of various kinds of objects, paintings,
byzantine icons, metallic objects or various metallic materials,
ceramics, wall paintings, glass objects and using these
techniques like optical tomography, non-radiating imaging, spectroscopic
mapping imaging or [inaudible], acoustic microscopy new techniques,
nuclear magnetic resonance, [inaudible] imaging, we are
providing to the end user in the community two dimensional
mapping images of the materials or [inaudible] and
finally combining them with tomographic information
we are edging to having by the coupling points
of the analytical points and the imaging methods,
high resolution and fidelity 3D tomographic
information with all the qualitative
information embedded on them. So this finally provides
us the possibility to support the vivid navigation of
the adventure of the art objects in time and in space so we
can navigate in the beauty of these objects while
the time passes in the space that they were found. I had a mind to give some paradigms which will be presented better
tomorrow in my presentation, just to be coherent with
the previous speakers, in order to have a more vivid
information about the kind of information that we received. Sorry, we can go here next. Of course, this is, I took from our
colleague Hilda some [inaudible] on some cases. The kind of [inaudible] that we
have is by infrared refractor for instance, the art
drawings beyond the visible so we have information
about what happens in the under layers of the object. And of course, in this case for
instance we can reveal foils on the gold leave in specific
areas of the art objects. And then, using Tera-Hertz for instance imaging we
have better penetration than the infrared imaging,
revealing the hidden gold in specific art objects. Mapping images as Antonio
had presented before, we have [inaudible] with
the materials on it as well as using synchrotron based
x-ray methods, we have evidence of the degradation on the
material on the surfaces as in the other layers and
then we have mapping images and also hyperspectral imaging we
can observe better the distribution of the [inaudible] of the object. And finally, tomography
is [inaudible] here with which we can navigate the depth of the information the object
revealing the pathology of the application with various
varnishes in the pigments in depth. Since philosophy means Praxis, in
work package 11 of IPERION project, we are trying finally to transfer
this innovation and recommendation about art objects to
the industry and mainly to small medium enterprises
and vice versa, I’m not sure. The osmosis between research
community and industry or mainly SMEs will be stressed
targeting to the creation of novel products and
spin off companies. These guidelines of European
Commission [inaudible] and I do believe the market
needs such kinds of actions but this action is
multidirectional interaction, I would say because this processes
that are needed to be done in order to reach such a target are
unidirectional and are characterized by the interactions in order to try
to match the supply with the demand so we have to see what is a demand
and what is a market behind this and in this case there
are many factors actually. Mainly, the researchers/us which
have to place their ideas in order to chase for new funding and then
the other side we also have the institutions where they
have to adapt themselves to new global European and
national research policies and what about the social impact
in assessment? We have to have a turnover to
the society about the findings that we were gaining and give
this knowledge to the society back and then the companies are the other
actors in private sector which need, indeed in the planet the companies
need new ideas and new opportunities in order to overcome recession. And finally, the government,
the decision makers who want to assess their investment in
order to account for their policies and here we have to fight
towards the governments in order to take care of cultural heritage. And the various actors of
course imply various needs, which much be coordinated
an then main channels for research results transfer up to now have been the traditional
patents databases usually in the patent offices Of course,
these kinds of channels in order to disseminate your knowledge,
the patents are restricted and they are not so well
accessible via the web technologies. Therefore, we thought that new
instruments are needed in order to transmit the knowledge and
social media is a kind of tool in order to do this work. Because of their features, scholarly
community has increasingly employed social medial in order to
communicate their results in a better and faster way
and furthermore studies about new metrics based on
social media are being developed. What are the existing tools? The existing tools of social media
are like LinkedIn or Academia, ResearchGate, okay
Facebook, I don’t believe that but in any case this
is also social media. This situation is so the power of social media is constantly
increasing, indeed it is increasing and the new generations
are using them. For this reason, we thought that
the ad hoc social media focused on innovation and technology
transfer could increase the communication between various
actors that I presented you before and the whole innovation system. So, in order to maximize
the technology transfer within the IPERION project, based
on common interests between industry and research area, we
are looking forward to win to win collaborations. A new tool, we decided to develop
a new tool which is named SpinBook which was developed by IRCrES and
finally was adapted in collaboration with the ORMYLIA Foundation
for the needs of work packet 11 of
the IPERION project. While I’m presenting you first
this tool that is placed now into operation and from now
on we will start using this. SpinBook considers all
types of actors involved in the innovation process
from researches to companies, public administration, investors,
intermediaries enterprises. These are the stakeholders of this. We expect that SpinBook will
be used by various actors. Political decision makers and
universities should also use this so as far as one can
enter to the system to build a profile identifying
himself as a researcher or enterprise or broker, or
founder, or public administration. You make a login and you
make a profile there. Also, we expect that
industrial sector should be able to access the selected hi-tech
information in order to assess in a reliable way the
economic potential of the range of available skills and to
have the chance to acquire it within a short space of time. The industrial sector is there. I can skip this, so then in
SpinBook, we have the possibility to have a direct communication among
these profiles so SpinBook aims to set up a social room
between all the actors for the innovation process giving
them a sustainable visibility and also giving a boost
to new ideas and projects. We have concrete control of
the data and careful validation so when you are filling your
profile you are filling some basic information related to the
research and to the institution in order to identify them. This can be done in some minutes and then this is a real-time
system informed real-time so the various factors among
them can start communicating and exchanging ideas
but the core objective of SpinBook its powerful search
engine inside, with the capability to retrieve information
extended to any type of document that is loaded into the system. You can search about what kind of
technology you can find with this. And then, this is done by
another form and that’s the form where the researcher
or enterprise can enter and fill what is the expectation
or what is the innovation and what is the pattern
that had developed. It can also add some multimedia
files there like documents, videos, whatever related to the
pattern that he has done so we are knowing exactly
who does what and where. And then, I would say that the
sole prerogative of SpinBook is that it can also provide
the summary sheet in which the researchers
decided to specify in more detail the applicative
potentialities of their results. Such information, for obvious
reasons are confidential and have been collected in a
special section of SpinBook and appear locked to
the consultation. To access the full reading of this
tab, users can get in touch directly with the researcher
via a private message. In this case, the software foresees that they want [inaudible] gives
access to the one that asked for it and then this is accessible
to other users and then the collaboration
can start the discussion. In conclusion, we need to
provide the tools in order to give our technology to the
ones that are interested for this and we are provided on the
other side this heavy heritage that I have described to you before. The acquisitions of new technologies
are of paramount importance for the European SMEs which usually
can only invest limited resources in the innovation. Moreover, it’s crucial to
promote strong interactions between public research and the
industry through related figures as investors and intermediaries. Therefore, SpinBook’s main
result will have to concretize into a real European knowledge
community in the field of cultural heritages like a
place of meeting and sharing between the main groups involved,
as well as a progressive space of aggregation of any stakeholders
working in the process of production and utilization of innovation. SpinBook is already published and
now you can see the link there and join it, and not we will
start filling it with companies and patents mainly starting from
the users of the IPERION project and then we will see how it
will go, so thank you very much. [ Applause ]>>I’m going to stand
here and you can share, there’s enough microphones
now I think and I think right in saying these microphones get
picked up by the camera but not to the audience so it’s not a
bad room actually for projecting. We have about 10 minutes assigned
to questions and hopefully answers. Does anybody want to kick it off with a question for
any of our speakers? And if not, I’m going
to get us going.>>I have one, sir.>>You have a question?>>Yes.>>Go for it.>>This is technical but I wanted
to ask, what are the dimensions of the various layers, if you know?>>Of the various->>Layers.>>Of the various layers yes,
they are about micrometer layers. The layer of embedded nanoparticles
is about 200 nanometers in thickness and thanks to the efficiency of
the [inaudible] spectrometry, we are able to measure
exactly with certainty of course, these different layers.>>Can I just ask some general
questions to Michel and to Antonio about the three labs, so
MOLAB, [inaudible] and FIXLAB, just can you talk a little
bit about the process of how decisions are made about who
gets access to which instrumention? Michel, do you want to
start off with the FIXLAB?>>My laboratory gives access to the
three MOLAB, [inaudible] and FIXLAB and each, to get access to that,
you have to fill a proposal and as Antonio has mentioned
they are called twice a year and these proposals are
evaluated by peer review panels, one for each access and if accepted
the applicant will enter in contact with the access provider and
they will have the possibility to find a date where the MOLAB
can go to the work of art, when the applicant can come to the
archives in the different centers or when the applicant can come with
his objects, with his artifacts to be analyzed either in
Hungary or in France for FIXLAB.>>There is a panel for the
examination of the peer review. This is usually three people
and nobody from the providers of the service is part of the panel, [inaudible] everything
is then [inaudible]. MOLAB is the only one
infrastructure, which goes the other way around. The community is paying for
the operators, not for the use and that was very difficult. I was on the committee in
the beginning and they say but we do not have the forms, we
have the forms to pay the users, not the operators and then the
second big question was how much does it cost for MOLAB to be
a European infrastructure. Because usually, the infrastructure
are very, very expensive [inaudible] and hard to convince
but they were convinced that [inaudible] was
important but the software for the professionals were unique and that made the infrastructure
unique.>>It’s probably different
for each of the three services but do you think the amount of time
or funding allocated is about right? Are we getting the right
amount of applications to projects being accepted or is it
too competitive or is it too easy? How is it sort of working out?>>The applications are
helped by an access board. That means if they wish
to write a proposal, if they want they can enter in
contact with the access board and they will have counsel
from the access board in order to reach the exact time.>>There is [inaudible]
facilitated proposal but in terms of your questions, I would say that there [inaudible] very
few proposals [inaudible].>>Jorgen, I have a
question for you as well. I’m always intrigued with these
projects that try to pull together, we call it best practice or
whatever it is where you’re trying to get different groups who
probably have very established ways of working and you’re trying
to get them all to kind of adopt one methodology. Is it too soon to say in practice
the ease of that happening or not? Do you find people open to that
seeing a benefit or people kind of dig their heels in and
say my way’s the best?>>I think you already
answered it [laughter].>>It is difficult to find
common grounds in some places and convince each other that
that’s the way to do it. Sharing is also a difficult issue
in this, how much do you share and how well do you do it? Talking about this, the founder of
the [inaudible] in the 19th century, when he developed a good yeast he
went out in Europe and offered it to all of the other
breweries in Europe so we could have a good competition on who could make the best
beer based on the same formula and that is a very
generous way of doing it and [inaudible] Foundation also
expects that any research that comes out of the research that they
fund will be publically accessible immediately as it is, so that will
set new standards and I think more and more foundations have
this request which means that we are obliged to
coordinate our actions, to make it interpretable
for other parties.>>Jay?>>One of the parts of IPERION is
looking [inaudible] how different people photograph cross
sections and so a number of people photograph the same
cross section and so a number of institutions have changed
their photographic procedure to [inaudible] everyone else did it so when people can see a clear
benefit and improvement in process, I think people are
willing to change. It’s only when perhaps there isn’t a
clear indication for why [inaudible] that you will get [inaudible].>>Sure and I’ve been remind
for anyone speaking down here, if you’re going to say anything a
bit longer than a few words come up here because we have
to have it on camera but if I can paraphrase very, very
quickly, in the grounds project that was presented very
quickly and will come up later, no doubt about it, Joe Padfield
found that when there’s a real need for photographing in a different way to compare grounds it actually
happened quite quickly. You also have to adopt
one method don’t you so maybe this is a political
discussion, I’m not sure, I’m just intrigued at how it
actually works in practice.>>It depends on [inaudible].>>Was there another hand up here?>>I’m very curious too because the
SpinBook is something like Facebook- [ Inaudible Comments ]>>I’ll repeat it,
SpinBook is like Facebook.>>I’m very curious, I forgot to
ask this question, how do we control that we don’t have fake profiles
on SpinBook because I [inaudible] for example and [inaudible]
for the rest of my life and I will improve this
dream through a fake company and put the company on SpinBook. It is a nonsense question
I understand but I mean, it has been filled with
something which is real, which is connected to the reality. How can we be sure that
what is inserted is real?>>Let me just repeat the
question for the camera. The very brief version of the question was how do we
prevent fake identities appearing on SpinBook whether it’s a
company or another sort of profile?>>In the entrance for there are
four people that will be a committee in order to assess what is
getting into the system so up to there, we cannot do any more. We can [inaudible] I suppose
sometimes if something is, now we have all the
capabilities, when we have an email or a contact point inserted by Googling it several
times you can have an idea if something is fake
or something important. There will be this committee in
order to make this check initially and then we will decide if we
are going to leave the profile or communicate with this guy.>>Dou you want to come up Jay
if it’s going to be a bit long because this is a bit strange. They’re all going to
hear the question and I’m going to have to repeat it. I think we’ll make
this the last question. Come up, yeah.>>Hello, I was just going to say
that people can apply for more than one access at the
same time and sometimes if people are putting together a
project which makes use of more than one access that can be quite
beneficial and the other thing to say is that members of IPERION
can’t apply for these accesses so it’s all for people outside
of the project so it’s not like we can all apply for our own
access and it’s all really great. It’s actually for other people
so the purpose of these sorts of presentations are trying to get
other people to make applications to IPERION because we can’t
apply for our own accesses.>>But all within Europe right Jay? At the moment?>>As far as I understand yes.>>[Inaudible] you cannot
apply from the [inaudible] which is in your country. For instance, in Italy you cannot
apply for the Italian MOLAB because they assess [inaudible].>>Great well no more hands up. We’re going to take a quick
break, 15 minutes is good? I want to say a few things but first
please thank our fantastic panel for this.>>My name is Barbara Berrie. I’m head of the Scientific
Research Department and I’m standing in for [inaudible]. Unfortunately, Emiliano [assumed
spelling] has a family health emergency and our thoughts
are with him at this time. I know he would have loved to have
been here with us and I also know that I won’t come even close
to being able to give you as much information as
he has at his fingertips but I have a great panel here, which
will help me work on all of this. But before we get to the panel,
I just want to talk a little bit about some of Emiliano’s work. He is one of those rare people who
works not only interdisciplinarily but also truly multidisciplinary. He’s trained as a medievalist and
he has worked to build a platform for the digital infrastructure
of research, digital research in humanities and it’s called
CENDARI and that stands for, and I have it written down somewhere
pardon me, maybe somebody can find which piece of paper
did I wrote this on, it’s the Collaborative European
Digital Archive Infrastructure and in fact, there are some
pages in there that have “technical documentation” and that
is really filled with information and the kinds of words that I can’t
get my head around like light F and pineapple, RDF converters, nerd (that one I do
know) and [inaudible]. All of these kinds of words that
describe what you need to know in order to build this
kind of infrastructure and I can’t really get there
but I think that web page, that documentation
shows it very well. CENDARI is like DARIA, which
you’ve heard about and [inaudible], and Parthenon and the new DIGILAB. These are all pan European
initiatives that are being developed as part of the infrastructure
to promote digital research in humanities but today, I have a
great panel that’s going to talk about some of the nitty gritty
of doing that, really talking about where the rubber meets the
road on this and about what kinds of content we’re trying to prepare
to be loaded into these kinds of infrastructures and
some of the challenges of not only the foundation for the
infrastructure but also the layers on top that we will
be interfacing with. Since everybody’s bios are in the
program I’m not going to read those and also because we’re going to change the format
up a little bit here. I’m going to ask all the panelists
to speak for just five minutes so we’ll go through everybody’s
project and perceptions and then I’ll come back with
specific questions that are tying up some of the common
threads in the challenges that each person is describing in
their effort and their endeavor, and then I’ll open
up the floor to you. As you heard that there is no
microphone for you except these ones so if you have a question or a
comment to make, there are plenty of seats up in the front row so as
you’re thinking of your questions if you’re going to want to ask some,
please come sit in the front row and you can share the
microphones with us. My panel starts, I’ll introduce
everybody it’s Merv Richard who is Chief of Conservation
at the National Gallery of Art, he’s my boss [laughter]. Next to him is Joe Padfield
from National Galley of London, Cecilia Frosinini who
is Vice Director of the Opificio delle Pietre Dure in
Florence, Fenella France who is here at the Library of Congress
and Michele Derrick, who is at the Museum
of Fine Arts in Boston. You’ll notice that we’re
mostly museum based people, something that was noted to
and eluded to this morning, that a lot of what goes on in
cultural heritage is happening in museums in America but with that,
I think I’ll start at the far end and ask Merv to tell
us about his forays into digital heritage research.>>If you can’t hear me then raise
your hand, I’ll try to speak loudly. Like most of you in this room, I actually sit here
with multiple hats on. The National Gallery actually
has a very long history of doing collaborative projects,
both scientific research as well as in conservation with
institutions around the world and we have fostered that. Now, there’s a caveat here. On the flip side, there’s a long
tradition particularly in America but maybe equally in Europe
of yes, you collaborate with your collaborators
and you share information but there’s a long history
of conservators not wanting to share information with
the much larger community for a variety of reasons. That’s not why we’re here today,
we’re beyond that now thankfully and for the purpose
of collaboration, many of us have long felt the need
to share data much more extensively than is possible through just
these mutual collaborations. As a result, the National
Gallery, in partnership with other museums including
some of you in this room, has embarked with support
of the Mellon Foundation and Alison is here today, I’m sure
you all know Alison or I hope so but anyway, we have been
working for the last seven years on something called
Conservation Space, which some of you are familiar with and Conservation Space is
directed towards the management and preservation of the documents
that we generate in the course of conservation as well as in
conservation science and the purpose of it is to get away from filing
cabinets filled with pieces of paper that typically require someone’s
memory to remember oh yes, we did such and such with such
and such 10 years ago and to get into a situation where the
information is much more readily accessible and by accessible
that can be to your local conservation
community, that can be to the entire
public if one wishes. So with Conservation Space,
we looked for the development of a digital took that would
number one, facilitate the day to day working practices
of conservators because if there’s anything that
I’ve figured out over the years, if you don’t create something
that people actually want or need to use then the likelihood of them actually using
it is somewhat reduced and with Conservation Space,
the objective was to find a way of creating, storing, searching, as
well as sharing all of the records that we are producing and when I
say records this is both in the form of written documents
as well as images. And so, I’m happy to say that
Conservation Space is live, I mean it’s real now,
it’s not just a concept. We’ve put it into production
at the National Gallery of Art at the moment and we are sort
of doing a slow, rolled out use of the software at the moment. It is web based which means
that it lives in the cloud. The information on a document by document level can be made
accessible to user groups that you define so in other
words, you can restrict it solely to yourself, you can restrict it to
people collaborating on a project, the people who collaborate can be
in the National Gallery or anywhere in the world as long as they
have user access and if you want to share it with the
whole world on a document by document basis then you can
do that as well very easily. The scientific department is
actually one of the most rapid, I think, adopters of starting to
incorporate the scientific data into the system and when
I say scientific data, that means that it’s in the form
of data tables and in the form of things like images of graphs. We are not trying to
address proprietary software that instruments develop. This is where we are and we feel
that this is a huge stride forward in terms of collaboration, which
is what this meeting’s all about and look forward to sort of future
interactions with all of you.>>Thanks Merv.>>Good afternoon, I’m from the UK, just one of the non-American
people [laughter], there’s two people from the EU. I trained originally as a
chemist and then I trained as a paintings conservator and then
I’ve spent the last 16 years working with computers. A lot of people working in cultural
heritage work with computers. It’s quite a normal thing where
that’s just answering emails or whether that’s writing reports
or typing up questions or looking at pictures and a lot of the
work that we’re trying to do at the moment is to
see how we can capture that effort that’s already
put in and make more of it. So as Merv said, Conservation
Space is looking at trying to simplify the administrative
structure that already exists when you type in word documents but
instead of saving them in once place on your computer, you save them in a
place that other people can see them and managers can organize them. It’s a question of if we come up
with a beautiful computing system that allows you to do all of the
things you’d like to do but all of the work to do that is on top
of all of the work you already have to do, it doesn’t matter how good
the system is, no one is going to use it they just don’t have time. So, in IPERION I’m responsible for
work package eight, which is looking at developments in
digital documentation. The budget is good. It’s not huge so we’re not
looking to build systems but what we’re looking to do
is to test systems and as soon as Merv releases Conservation Space
we’re going to have a play with it but it’s looking to test ideas
of how people actually do things so we’re looking at small tools that
are being developed to help speed up individual little jobs. Now, as I said, people use
computers all the time anyway but the thing is, there are large
numbers of IT professionals looking for projects in universities
to do and then there’s a lot of cultural heritage scientists
struggling to answer questions because of the limitations
of the software they have.>>I’m not sure I understand. [ Laughter ]>>How appropriate, go Siri! You need to speak more clearly Joe.>>It’s the accent.>>Make the tool more simple.>>I lost my train of thought
now so the question about is one of the first tasks in work package
eight is making practical solutions so actual things that people
can use, actual entities. You mentioned a couple of those
terms that are on the CENDARI sort of website you didn’t like, like
RDF and the others and there’s a lot of informatics that can be hidden
underneath pieces of software to allow people to do more
so there’s an awful lot of very clever technology sitting
underneath Conservation Space that as a user you’d never
have to see it and care about, but then a lot more is possible
with the information underneath. What we’re looking to do
is in the first task is to provide tactical solutions
to actually show things working and to show people how they
could do them themselves. The second part of the work
package eight in IPERION is to look at the descriptions, how do
we describe this information, how do we be connected together so
most of you will be able to explain to me what it is you do and
why you do it and what it is. If you then had to explain
it to a computer in a way that the computer could then
connect to other systems, it becomes very difficult because
you have to be very, very specific and consistent so that’s what
the second task is looking at. The third task is looking at
the notion of data formats, it’s that as we store more and
more of this information together, how can we make sure that people
will be able to reuse it tomorrow and in 10 years’ time and in 20
years’ time so as people have said, we’re not looking to replicate the
very quality pieces of software that developed with instruments that
are purchased but to be able to look at that data and to be able to
reuse the data later once these instruments no longer work and once
the software is no longer available is becoming important as we’re
generating huge amounts of data in some of these new techniques
that are becoming available so that’s the third task. And then the final task within
work package eight is actually to produce resources of
information that people could use and move forward so it’s
been discussed already one of the first ones you’re looking at
a grounds database so we’re going to try and look at building
a database of ground samples and explain how they all
connect together, how they relate to the different artists
and different institutions where the information is stored but
we’re also going to try and build that on a fairly generic
model so that that same database
structure can be used for other resources of information. So, how it can be used
for quantitative analysis of [inaudible] is going to
be another one that’s going to be looked at but we are
looking at practical solutions to doing these things so
Conservation Space, and I won’t go into actual numbers, had a
much bigger budget than we have within the particular work
package we’re dealing with. There was another very interesting
project which is hopefully just about to be released called Research
Space, which is going to be allowed to do different jobs, to do with complex cultural
heritage information and again, we’re looking to make use of
these and use them and test them within IPERION rather than try
and write them again because a lot of people are working on
similar projects and ideally through communication it
would be great to make sure that we can each use each other’s
work to move forward rather than continuing replicating
the stuff that goes forward so there are lots of resources out
there, people are working on them, there’s lots of really good
work being done and we’re trying to improve the communications
and provide real worked examples so that Siri can understand what it
is [laughter] we’re actually doing and it’s often a lot of these
complex projects are done, the project comes to an end, there’s
a very shiny product at the end of it, everyone really likes it
and then a new project stars up and they go well, we’re
not going to use that because we don’t know
how it works and well, we’re not sure we can do it so they
start again and build it again. If we can make sure that these tools
are being developed are building blocks, we can move forward and the golden rule is make
sure you can get your data out, actually it doesn’t really matter
what the software is as long as you can get your data in
and you can get your data out, you can move on to
whatever’s going to happen next so these are the things
we’re looking at within work package eight
for the IPERION project.>>Thanks Joe, Cecilia maybe you’ll
talk about some of these issues from a slightly different
perspective.>>Yes, always a different
perspective because I feel at a certain point
always out of context because I [inaudible] mainly working
with the scientist or a conservator and so sometimes I feel
like a child of a lesser God because it’s very difficult
that people trust me, people from the scientific
point of view. It’s very difficult to make me
reliable from their point of view and also when I come back
to my original field, to my original background
and discuss with traditional academic art
historians, I am always the child of a lesser God because of course,
I mix my origin and great tradition, God given experience and scholarship
for very trivial kind of studies so this is very interesting
from some point of view. It’s a continuous challenge
but this is also the challenge of the great change that Italy
experienced especially in the field of conservation because for many, many decades in the
last century especially, the art historians were not really
involved in conservation but some of them, very few of them and generally speaking
they were all involved in the research regarding
the museum, and the exhibition, and so on. And also, there was a very
low level consideration for the conservation field. Conservators were considered more
like the craftsmanship of art. They were not considered a high
level position and it lasted for a long time so I
think that in some ways, this idea of art separated from
science affected the development of also the material art history
which is very, very behind in Italy. In our experience at the
Opificio delle Pietro Dure, we have this pioneeristic position
because we have always thought to be a sort of Italian branch of
the [inaudible] and also because one of our founding fathers [inaudible]
was very close to all the people of the [inaudible] who founded the
school of the [inaudible] tradition but we were very distant
from the rest of the world. I think that in time and of
course these last decades, these gaps have been filled
and are already filled and now we share our
expertise and we participate to all the major projects. For example, in the case of IPERION,
I think it is very important choice that Opificio made to appoint three
different people as representatives in the frame of the different
task leaders of IPERION so we have a scientist, a
conservator and an art historian, which is a sort of coronation of all
the story that I have tried to send up during this short work. I think that I have benefitted
a lot as an art historian from this continuous experience and this continuous
sharing with the scientists. Most of the modern accomplishments
of art history cannot be so grounded, so based on the truth
in my opinion and especially what I like very much is the fact
that now it can deny many of the urban legends that were at
the basis of many constructions of the academic art
historians so I think that this has been my personal
experience but also a general change in Italy for the professional
of art history.>>Fenella, tell us about
your initiatives here.>>So I wanted to, can you
hear me okay at the back? So, I wanted to start
by sort of going back to Professor [inaudible] talking
about stem to steam this morning because we’re hearing
this theme come through and I really adhere very
strongly to the fact that we need to integrate the humanities and
the scientific data together because they’re not separate,
they actually rely on each other and then also in terms of GLAM,
everyone keeps talking about museums and I kind of want to put my
finger up and say no, I’m a library but we do science here too so we
have galleries, libraries, archives and museums, historic houses, all of
these institutions I think we need to think a little bit more
broadly in terms of our concept because the academic institutions,
many of them also have museums and libraries and I
very much want to pick up on Luca’s [phonetic] point
this morning where he talked about data not just being
the captured document but the physical collection and
I’ll come back to that at the end, but we have many libraries
and museums who have physical collections, reference collections
that are being shared. And so, I think that comes back
to what is data, both physical and digital components of the
same and as part of that too, what are archives and repositories because the repositories
are reference collections that when people retire are getting
thrown out and we all just cringe in horror when that happens,
really are critical parts of our institutions that
we need to be preserving. There’s many institutions with
lots of different initiatives and I very much like what
Joe was saying that we want to be interoperable
and we really want to build upon each other’s
initiatives so if I do a small piece that actually is useful for
something else, I’d really rather like my system to be agnostic and actually interact
with everyone else’s. And so we’ve talked, we’ve
heard about Conservation Space, Research Space, these [inaudible]
which I’ll talk about in a moment but also a little bit broader so
I don’t know how many of you know about [inaudible], which is a
partnership between the Association of Research Libraries and
the Institute for Museum of Library Studies and the
Sloane Foundation for the Center for Open Science so I think these
are initiatives we also need to be engaging with
and not reinventing when they’re already looking
at ways of sharing that data and trying to make that open. Delighted to have Cliff
Lynch[assumed spelling] here from the Coalition for
Networked Information and that’s something also
we need to really look at what other institutions we
should be engaging with as well because that allows us to use and
reuse our data more effectively, because if we all have data sets and
as we’ve heard, they’ve been used for one purpose, we often don’t know
what a different audience might want to use them for and I think that’s
something we really need to push on a lot more, to look
at the other audiences that might be interested
in what we’re doing. In terms of the collaboration
for sharing data and Joe and I will talk more about
this tomorrow but you know part of it really comes down to
the institutional policy and at what level management
supports that sharing and what level of sharing that is. There may be different models for
really looking at what type of data and how you can share
that level of data. I just wanted to finish up
with talking about CLASSD, another acronym, the Center for Library Analytical
Scientific Samples. Here at the library we both have
physical reference materials of all of the types of materials that
we have in our collections and have been linking that to a
web accessible database of all of the data that links back to
that original object or sample. Part of that has been trying
to drive ourselves crazy by extracting metadata from
proprietary instruments and encouraging the manufacturer’s
that we really don’t want to steal the software, we
just want to extract the data so really looking at what
are those open, sustainable, file formats that we can do
that we can extract that from, what other high level metadata we
need for people to be able to share and actually engage with that
database more effectively and then pulling that out of
that nonproprietary format. It came up this afternoon about
the verification and validation of the accuracy of the data so
part of this is actually insuring that there are experts who
are expert in a certain type of data analysis, I told Michele
that she is going to be put on here, that would actually be verifying
the accuracy of that data to make sure before it’s put out
there, that that has been validated and then in terms of assuring that we don’t have fake
institutions created that there would be member partners
who would engage and have to be part of their [inaudible] agreement
and then any other researchers from that institution would
have the expirable account that would go through
the institution. One thing I will talk about a
lot more tomorrow is this sharing of reference collections and
I know a lot of us have talked about the fact that we can’t
all have all of the same types of materials but it’s been
wonderful working with Michele because we’ve actually
been capturing data on some of our [inaudible] and pushing
that into the CAMEO collection so I think really a more coherent
approach which we’re all advocating for and seeing how much we can
use of each other’s initiatives to really get that global
perspective as Luca’s been pushing and to move us all
forward to next steps.>>Michele, maybe you just had
the introduction on CAMEO there. Maybe you can talk about
that and your development of an online digital resource.>>Okay thank you. I’m going to talk about
something a little different because this is CAMEO,
the Conservation and Art Materials Encyclopedia
Online, that has been online for over 16 years so, and
because I’ve worked on it for about 20 years,
I’ve got to brag. We actually made the cover page for Chemistry International,
September 2016. [ Applause ]>>We have, in the month of
November we had 11,200 users, that’s independent IP addresses. We have about 60 editors,
23 of which are in Europe and CAMEO now resides
on media wiki software so I think what I’m supposed to talk about though is how did
we get to this point? How did it actually develop? The main thing, I thought
I was talking loud okay, the main thing I think is that
we were a single institution that was focused on
a single subject. Now, our subject is fairly broad,
materials used in art or used in conservation or
materials that can affect art so that can be pigments, coatings,
adhesives, formaldehyde, insects, but we had a topic and
we had an institution. We had several people that
were allowed to work on it and we received generous grants
so we received an initial grant from the National Center
for Preservation Technology and Training, we received one
from the Institute of Museum and Library Surfaces,
IMLS, we received one from the Mellon Foundation and
one from the Crest Foundation. Each of these grants in general
helped us migrate the data from an older platform onto a new
platform but it also allowed us to do some data addition
and alteration and changes. We went from File Maker,
to Microsoft Access to SQL, to a proprietary software that we
were stuck in for about 10 years and had trouble getting our data
out of and now we’re on media wiki and let’s see, one of the most
important things that happened to CAMEO was our collaboration
with Europe and this was started by the dedication of Jean-Louis
Boutain [assumed spelling], who contacted me in 2005, and set
up a working group with [inaudible] and Jean-Louis Boutain
pushed people. Because of the goal of
transnational access, we thought one of the most important things was
to add foreign language synonyms to the English language records so
that those could be searched on so that anyone could get access to the
records and after [inaudible] ended, then we became a working
group in CHARISMA and that gets us to
where we are now. I did some statistics at
the beginning of CHARISMA. We had 48 percent of the users
were outside the US and now as of November 2016, 63 percent
of the users are outside of the US and in November of 2016, we
were used in 139 countries so I very much have
enjoyed working on this.>>Well Michele, that’s
great so this is an example of if you build it, they will
come but that has been one of the questions that’s been raised
by people funding and people working on developing infrastructures
for digital research and so your 11,000
users are from all over. Do you know if they’re using
it for high school papers, for technical art history,
for painting?>>I have no idea. One of the things about CAMEO
is that when it started, there wasn’t much competition out
there however, now there are lots of data bases that are very
specific for painting materials, for adhesives, for stones, etc so one of the things
we’re doing is linking to those different databases and I
check the people that are linking to CAMEO and one of the museums
is the Metropolitan Museum. They have their wonderful art
historical database that’s phenomenal and they actually link
to CAMEO for specific informations on the materials that are
used in the works of art.>>Maybe Joe, I can
just ask you a question about the IPERION initiatives. Have you in your work package
said who your audience should be?>>Yes and no. Because that particular work
package one of the tasks is looking at building resources, most of the
work is actually building process, how do you actually do jobs? The audience of the actual resources at the end are primarily aiming
towards cultural heritage scientists so people that actually
wanted to research rather than people just having
to explore it for fun. The intention is that the resources
will be open to the wider public but they’re not being written
in such a way to engage with, it’s simply a different level of
resource that would be required to actually produce that.>>Merv, Conservation Space
on the other hand is written for a specific audience
in its concept.>>Right in terms of concept I mean, Conservation Space is being
developed to solve a problem in institutions which is to
facilitate the actual work processes or workflow of practicing
conservators and conservation scientists. Now, when I say that, in essence
though what we’re developing is a document management system that is
intended for museums and libraries and in fact, some of the
biggest users may end up being conservators in libraries. From that standpoint it is solving a
specific problem but then when I say that we already have curators at the
National Gallery who are interested, oh can I use that as a research
tool and the answer is yes. So, it actually has expandability
and one thing to emphasize here for those of you who are
familiar with semantic approaches to database development, I mean,
Conservation Space is built on top of a significant Open Source
platform at the bottom-most layers, something called Alfresco
[assumed spelling], for the techies in the room and then there’s
a platform on top of that, that the company we’re working
with [inaudible] developed and it’s a semantic
database and the advantage of the semantic approach is that the
ability to now map to and interact with other databases
is expanded in our view and so you can link to
many other databases.>>You know, thinking of linking
makes me think about librarians and archivists and finding
resources so I’m really glad that we have Fenella here but I
think one thing that these objects that are tools proliferate
our ability to discover them is
going to be challenged. But one of the ways that this
can be helped is by the linking and I’m interested in hearing
how much linking is going on but Fenella, perhaps I could ask
you do we need to have standards if we’re going to be
linking among databases? Or are there ways to get around that
or should we think about that now?>>So it’s come up a few
times today that, you know, will people do what you want them
to do and I think the challenge is that whenever I, I started this
initiative about nine years ago and I asked all my colleagues at the time what do you want
to see in this database? And basically they said,
put something up there because we don’t really
know until we see something so that wasn’t really particularly
helpful but I think you really need to start from a standard and
then what we have done is try to standardize the
approach of the open access, the standardized file formats,
extracted metadata, engaging people who are expert in different
instrument, but also then trying to make sure that the structure
is robust enough to add in addition fields when people
suddenly say wait a minute, there’s another way of
describing this that we can now do, we have a new instrument,
can we add that in? So part of it is I really do
think we really do need to try to standardize because otherwise
one of the challenges we all have is that being such a multidisciplinary
field when one person says data someone
else hears something different and I think we’ve all
had that discussion where we’re using exactly
the same words and at the end of the discussion, five people have
gone in 12 different directions so one of the challenges is
how much we can have some sort of shared terminology
while still recognizing that there are nuances in there. But yes, in order to share we do
need to do that, but the data needs to be in a format that
is usable to that user. So for example, I may
be using something in a completely different
way to Joe or Michele, but as long as that data is in a
structure that they can extract and reuse then I think that’s
the critical component.>>So along those lines
Cecilia, the kind of information that you would want to pull from
a digital repository or asset? X-radiographs, cross-sections?>>Yes, everything [laughter].>>She doesn’t want too much, but some of these files
are going to be huge right?>>Yeah.>>And how do you guide an
art historian to looking at them on a digital database?>>Here comes the problem
of the location especially in the university I think. We are struggling but I think that probably [inaudible]
the key person tomorrow to explain better this problem in the modern university regarding
the conservation scientist, their key role as a sort of bridge between the traditional
art historian, the traditional scientist. From my point of view, I think that
we need to have a very important, at this point, it is very important
to have a generation of teachers that try to train these new kind of
figures and this is very important. For example, in Florence, the
University of Florence has a school of specialization for art historians
which is really a very formal, very academic but they have
selected some specific courses, one is called scientific diagnostic for art historians,
which is very nice. It’s a sort of [inaudible]
you could say so you know what [inaudible] was,
it was trying to teach to the son of the King of France whose formal
title was the [inaudible] of course and try to explain that in an
easier way and the very basic of all the subjects for the cultures
so I think this idea that comes in our university to have
for example diagnostics for art historian is
something interesting because you are not aimed to
explain them all the principles of chemistry, or physics or
whatever but to try to teach them which are the questions and which
are the more probable investigations that can give some
answers to these questions. So I think that this is a good idea
and this is also probably the idea that we could keep in mind when
trying to build this linking between all the different databases
so you need different users.>>I think we might
need new librarians too, to help the art historian
going to the library to discover these tremendous assets
because so far as I can tell, some of these are available already,
you just have to know where to look. But in terms of training,
I wasn’t actually thinking of getting the conversation
on to training quite yet but if we can just stay
on that for a moment, Merv and Joe you both trained
as conservators so you had to have some science and I
think both of you actually came with science undergraduates rather
than art history as undergraduates and then picking up
science as a conservator, but if you can cast your minds
back, how difficult was it to have one class with some
people with a science background and some people with none
to have the same class? How do we need to solve
this problem? Who can be the trainers
for the art historians?>>I remember people
breaking out into tears trying to explain certain
aspects of science. I think the difficulty with
this type of training is that you don’t necessarily
want to turn an art historian into a chemist or an
IT professional. You want to give the art
historian enough understanding to know the questions they
should be asking or to know who they should be
asking the questions of. I think for university students, we need to tell them you’re an
art historian, you need to go to a chemistry class, insuring
that they understand the purpose of the chemistry class is to
allow them to ask questions rather than for them to become a
chemist is quite important. Having a clear understanding of
what people are trying to learn, so I would have thought for
an art historian the best way to get information together on
a particular artist would be to get every single object ever
created by that artist into one room to gather together all of
the historical examinations that have been done of all of
those objects into the one room, and then all of the specialists
who did all of that work into the one room, all at your
beck and call and with a few people to interpret the different
languages that were done. Now theoretically, you could come
up with a computer model to do that but that’s kind of where we’re
aiming towards and I would say that a big issue here is
trust because if we’re looking at pulling information from lots of
different places, you need to know where it’s coming from
and that you can trust it. We’ve got a lot of stuff in the main
press at the moment about fake news, which is slightly more severe
but people need to know if an examination has been
done, where was it done, do you feel that’s an
okay interpretation because people aren’t generally
going to be able to understand all of the raw data underneath
even if it’s available.>>That was the case before it was
digital too wouldn’t you agree?>>Yes.>>It’s just that now with
the proliferation of access, we have to be more careful.>>You just have more
questions, that’s the difficulty. I mean, instead of sort of spending
20 years exploring an archive, you may spend a week exploring
four so you’re going to be hit by so much more information. Understanding that you
can make quick decisions about what you found
could be quite important.>>Thanks. Michele, you have CAMEO
which started off you said with a rather broad remit
but can you talk a little bit about the data landscape
and how starting from there might have changed how
you decide what you’re curating in your archive, your
digital archive?>>Sure so, at the point we started
CAMEO, we were taking information from the books on our
library shelves and putting it into
a digital format. Because the books were being
submitted to me and I was putting it into the format, I had
a standardized structure that I used for every single record.>>So wait, can I just say that
goes back to your fidelity issue? These were books Michele
that you trusted.>>Yes.>>Okay.>>Yes and it’s documented still in the CAMEO records what
data sources were used to generate information in that
record and when I found data sources that had discrepant information,
it’s actually recorded there because I found them and I’m
sorry, I lost my train of thought.>>How did it grow? It grew from just taking the
traditional kinds of material from books and spread out?>>Right, exactly so the first
database for CAMEO was textual only. When we got it into the SQL format
then we were allowed to add images so we actually had an image
collection specialist that was able to take a lot of micrographs
himself, he pulled all the [inaudible]
pictures off he could off and added them there, he searched
the web for other pictures and put them in with credits
and we expanded to that, and then we started putting
data in so we have IR data, [inaudible] data, x-ray
defraction, x-ray fluorescence, polarized light images, anything
we could get for the materials. Some of that came from
our conservation records, some from our scientific records, others from other people
submitting them.>>And Fenella, along those
lines with CLASSD, is that to try and help fidelity of the
digital part of the content? How do we also make sure that
we’re not getting fuzzy spots on the x-radiographs
that Cecilia’s cohort->>So it’s a combination you know
I think of what we’ve always done with the analog and then the expert
and Michele is intimately involved with [inaudible] as well but
going from that sort of model where you have an expert
who will be responsible for a specific instrumental
technique so you know this does not look
right and it gets sent back, so the combination of both
but also just allowing for more discoverability. I think that everyone’s doing so
much work and even when I hear about a different initiative, I had
three weeks to just even shut myself in a room and look at some of these
initiatives but there’s so much data out there that we just don’t
know and we’re not linking to and I think that’s a
critical point that’s coming through that there’s a lot of data
there that’s not being shared, it’s not being saved, funding
stops and it disappears somewhere and that’s where I
think we need to capture that before we lose all
of that historic data.>>Now on that note, I’d like to
open up the conversation to all of you and as I said there’s a
microphone right here, you can come and sit in seats as you’re thinking
of the questions, or you can shout out and I’ll transmit the
information into the microphone.>>I can shout, I think
I’m loud enough.>>You can stand near
the microphone.>>I’m near it. Hi, my question is I guess for the
group but particularly for Fenella and Michele, I’m interested
in the accessibility of data. We have some systems like
the [inaudible] database, which holds infrared
and [inaudible] data that is only available
by membership. You contribute and then you’re
able to use and you have to be an institution to use these. I used to work as a
private conservator and I did not have access to
these databases and I make a point that I try to get my students
membership so that they, as they go through their
career and they move from place to place will always have access
to these kinds of systems. I personally believe that we
might curate the data we put up but that we should let people use
it freely however they want just as they would use a book. I’m wondering what your thoughts
are on that and your experiences.>>Well I can simply say that
CAMEO is open to the public. Anyone can access it,
it’s free of charge, and there never will be a charge. The MFA is committed to
keeping it accessible.>>And with CLASSD, that’s the same. I talked about the fact that
we would start with sort of member partners because we want
to engage and encourage other people to put their data in so that was
the place to start with that, but it will be a registered user
and so there’s no cost for that. People are not required but we
really wanted to start with partners so that we would get more than
add data because there’s a lot of much more interesting data out
there so to answer your question, the data set of whatever
there is will be available and can be combined so for one
sample we’ll have the [inaudible], all of that linked to
the one object or sample.>>Joe?>>I was just going to say that
there are lots of sort of databases that are created that for various
reasons do need to be protected or closed to a certain extent. I think one of the very important
things to do about that is to record why they’re closed and if
there’s a time limit on the closing. I think some of the
projects like [inaudible], they were essentially
closed to begin with to insure people contributed. I think at a certain point perhaps
they could be then made open again because it’s reached
that critical mass. That’s where you put that type of
data, that’s where you would go for that type of data so
if people could access that information then that’s
great but I think to allow people to start off with a plan and a slightly more closed
environment helps people with the engaging with
that to being with, but there should be
a time limit on it. I mean, once after so
many years have gone by why can’t other people use it? I think if that type of
thing can be captured, that can be really important and
often, people end up doing stuff because that’s the way we do it so
yes, it’s closed because it’s closed and it’s sort of a
circular argument. If it’s closed because it’s
closed then why can’t we open it? I would agree with you the notion
that if information isn’t actually of a secret or personal nature
then if it can be used then great.>>Maybe you can, and
I’ll come back to Cecilia, just discuss the structure of Conservation Space allows
different levels of permissions.>>Yeah I mean with Conservation
Space there are two aspects to this question. I mean, one is from the
standpoint of sustainability and since Conservation Space
is intended to actually help with work processes then while the
software is made available freely, in order to maintain the software
into the future there will have to be some kind of membership
fee which is associated with just sustaining the software
and continuing to develop it. But in terms of them who is made
accessible since on a document by document level and with
the assignment of user roles, it means that you have
the capability of opening up those documents to
however broad a group you want so that you’re not making a decision from the onset about
who can see what. You’re deciding that this class of
documents the whole world can see it if they wish and so that’s
where the flexibility in how you approach it
can make a difference.>>Part of the structure
of the system allows that and Cecilia you want to->>Yes, I just wanted to point
to the fact that in Italy, we have a specific legislation about
how this data can be accessible or not because most of the works
of art are property of the state, so we are compelled
to follow these rules. These rules are very old because usually they were set
only considering the photographs, the traditional kind of
photographs but they assume that there should be an
authorization all the time that you ask for data coming
from different archives so now all the database
that pertains to research, to scientific investigation and
so on are put in the same box like they were photographs because
there is no specific legislation about all this kind of analysis. And according to these laws, we
need to ask for the authorization of the museum, of the church
or whatever, who is the owner of the paintings despite the fact
that the investigations are carried out by sometimes other
institutions, or universities, or so on so you need
a great collection of authorizations sometimes. That makes things really, really
difficult so that’s the reason most of these database are just for being
consulted, being read, being used but you cannot really retrieve
your original document. You cannot print an x-ray
or whatever without asking for a formal authorization.>>It shows that we still are
treating digital information sometimes the way we
treated analog information. We haven’t actually
adjusted our thoughts. I think the permission level
that Merv talked about is a way to maybe help institutions
deal with that. Fenella, you have some thoughts too?>>Yes, I just wanted to follow
on from both the user role and the access because one thing
we put into place was the fact that while we have
public domain so we have to make everything accessible but
partners may not want to put all of their collections out there and
so each partner would have control of their collection to say okay,
this came from a specific donor, we want to just keep this
for our in house location but this we will share, so there
would be those sorts of levels that would allow people to
decide at what point they make that accessible and
how they do that.>>One thing is clear is if I
have to say which is the priority in the data, it is
clear to me that a lot of information are already
available [inaudible] by all of us [inaudible] [laughter]. There are many different
types of databases. Now, [inaudible] how to
make them work together, how you can bring together
whether this can be done through the invention
of another database. I mean, this is something
that does not make me happy. What makes me happy is what
Barbara was saying perhaps we need to train people on how to
look for the information. I mean, I have many courses
at the University of Bologna. One of the key courses [inaudible]
32 hours of frontal lesson and 18 lessons of laboratory. The first six hours of the 32
are just related with how to look through the website
on the information that is already available on
a given particular [inaudible] such as malachite. We want to know everything
about malachite, where can we find this information and then you train them regardless
whether they are librarians or in this case they will be
conservation scientists first of all where to look, where to
find this information because they are already available. If you move a painting, I mean it
is very difficult to find the x-ray that [inaudible] because
as you say most of this information
has property rights and so they are not public not
because they cannot be made public but because there are rules
that do not allow you to make it so this information is frozen
there within the institution. This is why the [inaudible]
is becoming so important because what they are looking
for is all of the information which is not available and
probably will not be available because they are forced
to stay where they are because of many reasons,
the last one is that perhaps there are
institutions that don’t want to make their house
section available to the others just because they are->>Theirs.>>Just because they are theirs and
this is my job, I took a lot of time to do this job and I don’t want the
others to be part of this so we have to consider all of these
cultural diversity if you want because it relates also
with different types of cultural diversity so the key
point is the accessibility of data, not how to structure the already
available data in something else, how to make the accessibility
even more easy, in my opinion.>>Well, time will
take care of that one.>>What?>>Time will take care of that. People will die off, you know? [ Laughter ]>>Not us but you know->>And actually, if I could just
talk to that, this is something that came up very strongly when
we had the meeting in 2014, that we need a better communication
platform and ways to actually link to all of these different
initiatives because you know, I think there’s so much going
on that all these meetings that were being mentioned and I
think Luca was saying he got invited to a meeting two days
away, how do we make, this is a little bit past
the data but if we don’t know that a meeting is on we
don’t know where that is, so I think that’s another
part that we need to think about is how we communicate
and link more effectively between all our institutions.>>Another aspect of this is, I mean a while ago you were
asking the question about the fact that conservators come
from different disciplines so many have a background
in art history or studio art with limited chemistry
or vice versa. And so, there’s a learning that
takes place during the course of conservation training where
everybody has their strengths and weaknesses and everybody
helps each other out. Now, one thing that is a bit of
a problem when you look at people who are strictly studying
art history for example is relatively
few academic programs at the university level are
emphasizing the technical aspects of art history that I’m aware of. It’s gradually changing I
think but this is an area where I think many art historians
either enter the academic world or the curatorial world
without having an introduction to the technical aspects of
it in a very solid way anyway and so they happen upon it because
of personal interest or because of their experience
wherever they are. So, I think influencing
the academic training of art historians is one what that
we could influence the future. I think one thing that’s
very good is because we have become
much more effective at presenting our information
visually, that has really increased
dramatically an interest in what many people are
calling technical art history because obviously reading tables
of numbers does not go over well with many art historians but if
you can look at pictures or images that have been mapped to
show you specific information about where’s malachite in
this particular painting mapped on an image or the dramatic
increase in what we can do with hyperspectral and other->>Yeah, I think simple
imaging tools like Photoshop have helped
take us to that first step and the more advanced digital tools that are being developed
specifically for our use in layering multiple different kinds
of technical information in a way that gives an image
that an art historian like Cecilia can actually
work through and decode has moved us
significantly together over the past few years,
which is a wonderful thing. People do say that vocabulary has
been a great divide between the arts and the sciences but I think it’s
not just vocabulary, it’s also ways of thinking and I think
we should get into that. Before we go on with vocabulary,
someone has a question here.>>It’s more a remark as a question. I think for [inaudible] where
malachite is in a picture for instance, might
also be very interested to know [inaudible] educated
laypeople say oh that’s what I’m looking at so Photoshop
is one way of looking at it so that’s my remark.>>Oh Joe, while Jorgen’s coming
up do you want to, are you, okay all right, now we’re getting- [ Laughter ]>>All right Joe you get to go
first because you’re on the panel and then Luca, then Jorgen
and anybody else wants to come and ask a question,
you’ve got to get in line.>>Take a number.>>I was just going to
say we need to remember that this has the potential
for multiple different types of research happening at the same
time so if you have an art historian who is researching the use of a particular pigment
that’s a particular job, there’s a particular skill
set involved in that. If you then have a scientist
researching the analysis of a particular pigment, that’s an
entirely different form of research. You can then have a digital,
I don’t remember the term, someone doing digital humanities
who’s exploring how you present information on that
particular thing. There are a number of different
things to do and to sort of address Rocco’s point
beforehand, you spend sort of six hours training them
how to find these pigments- [ Inaudible Comment ]>>Yeah but it’s a question
about how many times do you do that before you work out,
just put it all in one place and then they can all find it? If you looked back 20 years ago,
how long would it have taken them to find the same information? Now, it’s not their research to make it more accessible,
that’s the thing. It’s someone else’s research
to make it accessible but if you’ve got a lot of
informatics people doing research, if you effectively can
say it takes us six hours to do this can you do it faster, can
we direct the research that’s done by other people to make
our research easier? I think that’s a tricky one because
often conservation science borrows from so many different fields we
can end up feeling it’s our job to do everything whereas
that’s not actually possible. Because we work in an interdisciplinary field
it’s very good to be able to say this is my area,
it’s not my job to do that but it would be really handy
if someone else can do it and then more we can
gather these questions, these issues that are
actually stopping people or slowing people down, we can
help each other move forward.>>It’s true.>>Luca? You want to weigh
in and ask a question?>>Yes, more than a question I
need kind of advice for the panel and not only from the panel but you
may remember that we [inaudible]. I remember having several
conversations with [inaudible] about where we are aiming to. By the way [inaudible]
so we will continue this cooperation [inaudible]. Coming back to the point, maybe
we are too crazy visionaries, too [inaudible] but I
need to know we are aiming to because we are actually
aiming somewhere and we had this nice
[inaudible] too. My personal feeling and I’ve
been involved in [inaudible], my feeling is that we need to speak about [inaudible] stone
age problems. We are speaking about
[inaudible] useless without tools. Maybe it could be useful to
teach how to extract information on malachite but that’s
very [inaudible]. You have the digital system there,
maybe [inaudible]but I expect that I will be able to ask my
digital research assistant very complex questions in the near
future and in our field I’d say one of these questions could be
look, I found this manuscript. There’s a very nice section
of drawing [inaudible] similar or related to [inaudible]
maybe before the age of that document and after it. Are you able to do that? Of course we need the
software [inaudible] but if you don’t have the database
accessible you will not have the software because nobody’s
going to develop the software for a non-accessible database
or a nonexistent database and if you get only the
database but not the tools, you will not [inaudible]. I think the most important knowledge
infrastructure around is Google because [inaudible] of the knowledge
that is freely available [inaudible] so we need to aim to this
[inaudible] situation where we can have research
in a [inaudible] heritage and humanities and in [inaudible]. When I’m studying an
object I put [inaudible] so if I’m studying a stone
I can access the inscription and everything that has been studied and when I’m studying inscription
[inaudible] I can access the stone [inaudible] historical
context because the way of doing research is
doing correlation and correlation can be only for the
moment done by humans but you need to provide the information
to the humans [inaudible]. That information must be there and in this very moment we are
discussing possible potential information there with the
exception of the [inaudible] but we cannot survive
without [inaudible] tools because this infrastructure
is databases plus tools, that will provide infrastructure
services.>>I think Luca has put his
finger on one of the challenges for doing the research, the
discoverability of information but then the intellectual part of
doing research requires our ability to synthesize and I think we do rely
on Google and we are going to have to get over that in a little while. Jorgen, you had a comment
or a question.>>Yeah well it is both, you mentioned that technical
art history isn’t being taught in very many places. It is coming up more and more and
we are now a two year master course in English at the University of
Amsterdam in technical art history where anybody here
[inaudible] and University of Stockholm they’re
starting up in September ’17, also a two year master for
technical art history combining the traditional art history and I
see from the colleagues I meet with in [inaudible] that there is
more and more questions being aired about technical aspects of the
objects that they are curating in the galleries but also
having more and more questions to the validity of the
science that they are provide so they will ask these groups
more and more questions related to getting access to
the data we have and their questions will
be more and more complex, and they will question whether
the data is trustworthy. I mentioned in my presentation
[inaudible] dates that are being provided actually
are validated because there are so many aspects of [inaudible]
dating that are in the open so what is the date in
reality and the more that kind of a question comes, the more it
comes to us as [inaudible] group to provide sufficient amount
of valid and validated data and I think the market will be
increasing particularly also thanks to the database that [inaudible]
the questions will be more complex and they will be [inaudible].>>May I ask the audience if
anyone has an idea of a tool that they wish was already existing
to help them do their research in digital humanities
or digital art history? So, we’re not quite getting the
message out of what’s available to be used so Cecilia, your group,
we need to maybe help them think about what tools they would
need to crack open some of the digital data we have
and that’s where Jorgen, your work with training will
help people devise the questions that then we build the tools to
answer, to crack open because some of these things are
hard like walnuts. Well, if there are no more questions
and since Fenella has offered to, but before actually, before
we do that I’m just going to give everybody on the panel
another one minute if they want to summarize their
thoughts about where we are and where they think we should be
going next especially maybe in terms of reacting to some of the
questions that have come up. Michele, shall we start with
you at this end this time? You’re feeling good about CAMEO.>>Yeah, I’m feeling good except
Joe has introduced me to a lot of possibilities of things that
can be done now that CAMEO is on the media wiki platform as far
as because now it’s multiple pages that you can search for but
apparently there’s applications out there that you can ask
questions and it can pull a set of pages together in a group
and create answers to more than just the straight
single material questions.>>That actually would
be really interesting. I was just thinking about some of
these things which are like books that have the first page for
the introductory learner, the middle pages for
the student learner and the whole chapter
is for the researcher. And the truth is that
the digital assets that we are building have
information at all of those levels. The challenge is to use them
at our appropriate level so if you’re going to
start that’s great.>>Well hopefully it gives me
something new to think about.>>That’s great. Fenella, concluding thoughts?>>So I think that very much making
the data accessible is critical but coming back to the datamining
and the tools, it certainly has to be there and I was on a working
group at the library a number of years ago and the whole
point they were saying was well, we’ve got this data,
it’s freely accessible but the point was there’s no way
for people to actually get to it and mine it and so I think those
two together really are something we need to look at to make ourselves
more functional to new audiences.>>Teach the people to work
together, that I think is not so easy because you said, it’s
more a matter of a frame mind, a matter of how you think, how
you approach different problems. The same question tells
different things to different people
according to their background.>>So we have bridges to build
as well as infrastructures under.>>I think one of the
dangerous things here when we start doing digital
humanities research is the technology to some extent is
not really the problem anymore. The problem is the
questions and the imaginations of the people doing the work
and people asking the questions so we’ve talked a number of
times about standards and one of the biggest standards,
the ontological standards to describe cultural heritage
information now is something called the [inaudible]. Now the [inaudible] has been around
and devised for 20 odd years now but they’ve just brought
out some new ones so there’s one called [inaudible]
which is all about modeling belief so you can go through
the whole structure of ontologically modeling how
much you believe something and whether someone else
believes something else and I think there is a
danger to some extent of technological level gazing in that you can spend years
doing technology research because it’s interesting and the technology research
is really fun to do. But, without the two
way conversation between the people actually
exploring the data or wanting to research the data that
other people have gathered, we’re missing the opportunity
and often it’s people say well, I don’t really want to get
engaged with the digital bit because I have no idea what
it is and it’s complicated and then you’ve got the digital
people who need to apply for a grant and to apply for a grant
it’s got to be new and novel which means they keep pushing
the boundaries and you end up with this bit where the
technology is going like this and you end up with
a really sharp spike. So, I think our difficulty
moving forward is making sure that the developments in the technology are actually
making people’s lives easier and making the jobs they need
to do easier and quicker.>>Okay challenge.>>Yes.>>I will sort of build on what
Joe just said which is that for me, I think it’s extremely important to
recognize that we need to have tools that are available to help people
do what they actually want and need to do, not to say that you
close the door on the fact that there are things that we
haven’t even thought about yet. And when Luca raises the question
of how do we create these tools, I think that it’s going to be very
important that the many databases like for example, if one is looking
for data it’s not very useful to a broad audience
to absolutely have to know exactly what
is this database and then go there and search that. You need to be able to find
it more at a Google-like way where the search for
information doesn’t require that you specifically go to
one site and certainly I mean, with Conservation Space that
information which is made accessible to a broader audience, our hope
is that people use a Google search with the right tools they can
actually find us and then you know, the gallery for example
is the Official Archives of the Crest Foundation and
all of that information, which we’re close to, will
be made fully accessible to the whole broad
community out there and it’s not absolutely decided
but almost certainly it’s going to happen by putting that
into Conservation Space but that will be available
to the public. I think that people using their
normal search techniques like Google or something like that
and then finding out that there’s this wonderful data
out there can really inspire people to dream things we haven’t
even thought of yet.>>Well that sounds like
a very good moment to end. I would like to thank all the
panelists and invite Fenella to come to the podium for concluding
remarks. [ Applause ]>>This has got to be one of the most unwieldy
microphones I’ve ever worked with. So just a few things to put out
there to prime you for tomorrow and make sure that
you’re still all awake. Just an overview that we’ve had a
really wonderful in depth overview of the state of research
infrastructure initiatives, we’ve looked at the challenges of
promoting these at a policy level and also looked at the differences
in approaches between the European and the US approach and the
different funding models and how that ties into, sort of pushing us
in slightly different directions. That, from the US side a number
of my colleagues and I have talked about the focus on some sort of
consortium to provide a united front in lieu of our Ministry of
Culture and what I very much like from [inaudible], how the
new baseline funding in the US, that we kind of are happy if
it’s flat and it’s not shrunk. It’s sad but it’s real. And how do we squeeze more
from the resources we have for our collaborative efforts? I think that’s really what a lot of
us are saying that we’re engaging in some of the efforts and
if we can make better use of those then we can really make
things go a little bit further. What I did find very strong though
is that the underlying thread in terms of the strength of the collaborations is
the personal connections and interactions and all of us
have found and have been motivated to engage more effectively because
of strong personal interactions and because we feel so
deeply about what we do and so I think that’s going
to help us all move forward with the wonderful approach to
really sharing and being engaged in what the field needs,
where the field needs to be. So this heritage network of
experts and professionals linked to the multidisciplinary fields and colleagues outside is
really what we’re trying to pull together here. And just as a final
point what I really, really want is my own virtual
digital assistant [laughter]. So thank you all so much. If you have any questions about
location [inaudible] at the back and if any of you would like a
quick tour through our labs just to see what we’ve got, we’d be
delighted to host that so again, thank you to all of
the speakers today and thank you all for
your attention. [ Applause ]>>This has been a presentation
of the Library of Congress. Visit us at loc.gov.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *