Sustainable Free: Lessons Learned from the Launch of a Free Service Supporting Publishing in Art History

J. Shulman
{"title":"Sustainable Free: Lessons Learned from the Launch of a Free Service Supporting Publishing in Art History","authors":"J. Shulman","doi":"10.18352/LQ.9587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hilary Ballon and Mariet Westermann, writing about the struggles of publishing in art history noted that “It is a paradox of the digital revolution that it has never been easier to produce and circulate a reproductive image, and never harder to publish one.”  If publishing in general is in crisis because of the seismic re-ordering in a digital world, the field of art history is the extreme tail of the spectrum; rights holders are accustomed to licensing image content for limited edition print runs.  Given this particularly challenging corner of the publishing work, a project initiated by the Metropolitan Museum offers some hope of a collaborative way forward.  What sociological re-engineering enabled progress on this problem?  It is possible that there are other lessons here too, that might throw at least streaks of light on other process re-engineering provoked by digital innovation in publishing?  This paper reviews how a leading repository of art (The Metropolitan Museum of Art) and a non-profit intermediary (ARTstor) created an alternative pathway to provide primary source content in support of image-intensive publishing.  This venture is framed in the context of a publishing system moving toward greater freedom and an aim to bring about ever lower (or no) fees to readers. In general, providing academic content for free requires a re-structuring of a public release process – either of processed content or less processed content.   To the extent that processing adds value, it might be worth paying for.   This case study argues that there are places where community wide interests align, describes what it takes to keep them aligned, and explores what we did collectively to facilitate re-structuring.  The conclusion explores whether there are lessons for open access publishing more generally in the example of cross-subsidization among mission (and not only marketing) driven organizations.","PeriodicalId":357594,"journal":{"name":"The Liber Quarterly","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Liber Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18352/LQ.9587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hilary Ballon and Mariet Westermann, writing about the struggles of publishing in art history noted that “It is a paradox of the digital revolution that it has never been easier to produce and circulate a reproductive image, and never harder to publish one.”  If publishing in general is in crisis because of the seismic re-ordering in a digital world, the field of art history is the extreme tail of the spectrum; rights holders are accustomed to licensing image content for limited edition print runs.  Given this particularly challenging corner of the publishing work, a project initiated by the Metropolitan Museum offers some hope of a collaborative way forward.  What sociological re-engineering enabled progress on this problem?  It is possible that there are other lessons here too, that might throw at least streaks of light on other process re-engineering provoked by digital innovation in publishing?  This paper reviews how a leading repository of art (The Metropolitan Museum of Art) and a non-profit intermediary (ARTstor) created an alternative pathway to provide primary source content in support of image-intensive publishing.  This venture is framed in the context of a publishing system moving toward greater freedom and an aim to bring about ever lower (or no) fees to readers. In general, providing academic content for free requires a re-structuring of a public release process – either of processed content or less processed content.   To the extent that processing adds value, it might be worth paying for.   This case study argues that there are places where community wide interests align, describes what it takes to keep them aligned, and explores what we did collectively to facilitate re-structuring.  The conclusion explores whether there are lessons for open access publishing more generally in the example of cross-subsidization among mission (and not only marketing) driven organizations.
可持续免费:从支持艺术史出版的免费服务中获得的经验教训
希拉里·巴隆(Hilary Ballon)和玛丽特·韦斯特曼(Mariet Westermann)在写艺术史上出版的斗争时指出,“数字革命的一个悖论是,制作和传播一幅再现性的图像从未如此容易,而出版一幅再现性的图像也从未如此困难。”如果说出版业总体上因为数字世界的重新排序而处于危机之中,那么艺术史领域就是这个光谱的极端尾部;版权所有者习惯于为限量版印刷提供图像内容许可。考虑到出版工作中这个特别具有挑战性的角落,大都会博物馆发起的一个项目提供了一些合作前进的希望。什么样的社会学重新设计使这个问题取得进展?这里也有可能有其他的教训,至少可以给出版业数字创新引发的其他流程重组带来一些启示。本文回顾了一个主要的艺术存储库(大都会艺术博物馆)和一个非营利性中介机构(ARTstor)如何创建一个替代途径来提供主要的来源内容,以支持图像密集型出版。这次冒险是在出版系统走向更大自由的背景下进行的,其目标是为读者带来更低(或不)的费用。一般来说,免费提供学术内容需要重新构建公共发布流程——要么是经过处理的内容,要么是未经处理的内容。在某种程度上,加工增加了价值,也许值得为之付出代价。本案例研究认为,在某些地方,社区广泛的利益是一致的,描述了保持它们一致所需要的条件,并探讨了我们共同做了什么来促进重组。结论探讨了在使命(而不仅仅是营销)驱动的组织之间的交叉补贴的例子中,开放获取出版是否有更普遍的经验教训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信