Automated Preservation: The Case of Digital Raw Photographs

  • Stephan Bauer
  • Christoph Becker
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7008)

Abstract

In digital preservation, a common approach for preservation actions is the migration to standardized formats. Full validation of the results of such conversion processes is required to ensure authenticity and trust. This process of quality assurance is a key obstacle to achieving scalability for large volumes of content. In this article, we address the quality assurance process for the preservation of born-digital photographs and validate conversions of raw image formats into standard formats such as Adobe Digital Negative. To achieve this, we rely on a systematic planning framework. We classify requirements that have to be evaluated according to their measurement needs. We extend an existing measurement framework using a combination of tools, image similarity algorithms, and purpose-built plugins. By combining metadata extraction, image rendering and comparison, and perceptual-level quality assurance, we evaluate the feasibility of automating the core part of quality assurance that is often the most costly part of preservation processes.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Digital negative (DNG) specification. version 1.3.0.0. Technical report, Adobe Systems Incorporated (June 2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becker, C., Kulovits, H., Guttenbrunner, M., Strodl, S., Rauber, A., Hofman, H.: Systematic planning for digital preservation: Evaluating potential strategies and building preservation plans. IJDL 10(4) (December 2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Becker, C., Rauber, A.: Decision criteria in digital preservation: What to measure and how. JASIST 62(6) (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bennett, M.J., Wheeler, F.B.: Raw as archival still image format: A consideration. In: Haag, D. (ed.) Archiving 2010, pp. 185–193. Society for Imaging Science and Technology, The Netherlands (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fraser, B., Schewe, J.: Real World Camera Raw with Adobe Photoshops CS4. Peachpit Press, Berkeley (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grace, S., Knight, G., Montague, L.: InSPECT Final Report. InSPECT (December 2009), http://www.significantproperties.org.uk/inspect-finalreport.pdf
  7. 7.
    Kerr, D.A.: The canon sraw and mraw output formats. The Pumpkin (1.1) (March 2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kulovits, H., Rauber, A., Brantl, M., Schoger, A., Beinert, T., Kugler, A.: From TIFF to JPEG2000? Preservation planning at the Bavarian State Library using a collection of digitized 16th century printings. D-Lib Magazine 15(11/12) (2009)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Okarma, K.: Colour image quality assessment using structural similarity index and singular value decomposition. In: Bolc, L., Kulikowski, J.L., Wojciechowski, K. (eds.) ICCVG 2008. LNCS, vol. 5337, pp. 55–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    van der Knijff, J.: JPEG 2000 for long-term preservation: JP2 as a preservation format. D-Lib Magazine 17(5/6) (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C.: Mean squared error: love it or leave it? - a new look at signal fidelity measures. IEEE Signal Processing Mag. 26(1), 98–117 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE TIP 13(4), 600–612 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephan Bauer
    • 1
  • Christoph Becker
    • 1
  1. 1.Vienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations