Citation
Hurych, J. (2000), "Why Digitize?", Collection Building, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 126-128. https://doi.org/10.1108/cb.2000.19.3.126.2
Publisher
:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
This paper was written in response to discussions of digitization at meetings of the National Humanities Alliance. The Alliance asked the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) to evaluate experiences of institutions involved with digitization projects and to assess the impact of these projects on libraries. Abby Smith, Director of Programs at CLIR, has been involved in converting library holdings into digital form at the Library of Congress and at the CLIR, and as an expert in this area she can best assess possibilities and limitations of the new technologies. She speaks objectively about advantages and disadvantages of converting traditional analogue material into digital form and points out differences between the two.
She writes:
digital texts are neither final nor finite and are fixed neither in essence nor in form, for they can be changed easily and without trace of erasures or emendations (p. 3).
Smith further points out problems with establishing the authenticity of a digitized work. She warns against the misconception that digitization can serve as a preservation treatment, substituting for microfilming, because in her view the digitized item cannot be considered permanent in the same way as the text fixed on paper. Smith points out that information in digital form is dependent on hardware and software, which often change and quickly become obsolete.
However, according to the author, there are also enormous advantages of digital collections. They provide incredible access to information because “they can make the remote accessible and the hard to see visible”. Also, images can be enhanced in size, sharpness of detail and colour contrast. Although the cost of digital conversion is very high, many institutions are involved in ambitious projects, some in collaboration with others. The author sees the promise of coordinated digital collection building among libraries and archives. She expresses hope for the extension of research and education with the help of digital technology but advocates continued use of traditional preservation technologies. The author also believes that digital information will not and cannot entirely replace analogue, because each contains different “ways of knowing”, and “each has its intrinsic virtues and limitations”.
Although there is no bibliography, index or glossary, and the author quotes an author without appropriate citation, the essay is valuable as a starting point for a discussion of the pros and cons of digitization. This work is valuable especially for academic and research libraries.