Visualization of Cultural Heritage Collection Data: State of the Art and Future Challenges
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2830759, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 1 Visualization of Cultural Heritage Collection Data: State of the Art and Future Challenges Florian Windhager, Paolo Federico, Gunther¨ Schreder, Katrin Glinka, Marian Dork,¨ Silvia Miksch, Member, IEEE, and Eva Mayr Abstract—After decades of digitization, large cultural heritage collections have emerged on the web, which contain massive stocks of content from galleries, libraries, archives, and museums. This increase in digital cultural heritage data promises new modes of analysis and increased levels of access for academic scholars and casual users alike. Going beyond the standard representations of search-centric and grid-based interfaces, a multitude of approaches has recently started to enable visual access to cultural collections, and to explore them as complex and comprehensive information spaces by the means of interactive visualizations. In contrast to conventional web interfaces, we witness a widening spectrum of innovative visualization types specially designed for rich collections from the cultural heritage sector. This new class of information visualizations gives rise to a notable diversity of interaction and representation techniques while lending currency and urgency to a discussion about principles such as serendipity, generosity, and criticality in connection with visualization design. With this survey, we review information visualization approaches to digital cultural heritage collections and reflect on the state of the art in techniques and design choices. We contextualize our survey with humanist perspectives on the field and point out opportunities for future research. Index Terms—Information visualization, Introductory and Survey, Digital Libraries, Arts and Humanities F 1 INTRODUCTION aims to assess the state of the art for a diverse group of read- ers and audiences. We assume the findings and discussions Arguably, it is cultural expression and exchange that dis- to be of relevance for InfoVis researchers and practitioners, tinguish humans from other animals. Devising and sharing cultural scientists and digital humanities scholars, as well objects, ideas, and practices enrich behavioral options, fa- as owners, curators and custodians of CH collections. The cilitates problem-solving, and thus drives the evolution of general purpose of this paper is to explore and consolidate human collectives [1], [2]. From physical tools and informa- this new field by summarizing recent achievements and by tion artifacts to arts and entertainment - cultures create and reflecting on future challenges. To do so, we will discuss collect things and pass them on across space and time. While the background of CH data (sec. 1) and describe our survey doing so, cultures are changing, and so are the means of methodology (sec. 2). On this basis we introduce the cate- transmitting their assets [3]. Digitization has expanded the gories of the survey (sec. 3), analyze existing visualization means for representing and transmitting cultural collections, systems (sec. 4), and discuss the findings in relation to a which makes large stocks of cultural content available, in range of contemporary humanities perspectives to derive principle for everyone and everywhere. Against the back- directions for future research (sec. 5 and sec. 6). ground of these large data collections, new types of typically web-based interfaces are assuming a role similar to galleries, libraries, archives, and museums as the ‘places’, where 1.1 Concepts of Culture cultural heritage (CH) can be experienced [4], [5], [6], [7]. The concept of “culture” has seen a multitude of defi- In this report, we collect recent developments of inter- nitions [8], [9], [10]. While everyday language often uses faces, which leverage methods of information visualiza- “culture” to refer to artful things and emphasizes aesthetic tion (InfoVis) to enhance access to cultural collections in or exceptional aspects (“the best that has been thought and order to support their scholarly analysis and casual appre- known” [11]), many discourses and domains use the term ciation. The survey sheds light on this emerging field, and in a much broader and pragmatic way. As such, culture also includes the whole portfolio of useful things and thoughts, • Florian Windhager, G¨unther Schreder and Eva Mayr are with the including the everyday customs and practices that make up Department of Knowledge and Communication Management, Danube how we live as a society, “that complex whole which in- University Krems. E-mail: fi[email protected] cludes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any • Paolo Federico and Silvia Miksch are with the Institute of Software other capabilities and habits” [12]. From a functionalist per- Technology and Interactive Systems, Vienna University of Technology. spective, CH thus comprises the whole arsenal of artful and E-mail: [email protected] useful assets that enable and refine collective reproduction. • Katrin Glinka is with the Stiftung Preussischer Kulturbesitz. E-mail: [email protected] From a more critical perspective, CH objects and contents • Marian D¨orkis with the Urban Complexity Lab, University of Applied also always deserve a second look at their implicit functions Sciences, Potsdam. E-mail: [email protected] and motivations (see sec. 5.3). Seen from such perspectives, CH objects also reveal the functions of social and cultural 1077-2626 (c) 2018 IEEE. Translations and content mining are permitted for academic research only. Personal use is also permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information. This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TVCG.2018.2830759, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2 Fig. 1. Types of cultural objects and assets (left-hand side), with tangible CH at the top and intangible CH at the bottom. The right-hand side shows a closeup of the structure of CH object data, consisting of a digital cultural object (left) and related metadata entries (right). demarcation or symbolic distinction [13], as they are also 1.2 Relevance frequently (re)produced under competitive, exploitative, or hegemonic conditions and circumstances [14]. From a visualization perspective, the relevance of CH data While early definitions of CH have mainly focused on arises from the specific challenges they pose to the design tangible assets (e.g., objects, tools, artworks, or buildings), of visualization and interaction methods. Data of CH col- more recent conceptions also emphasize the relevance of in- lections are set apart from other datasets by their rich and tangible assets, such as performing arts, crafts, expressions, often heterogeneous metadata, which are associated with customs, rites, or any set of practices [15] deemed worthy a wide variety of object types (e.g., images, texts, artifacts, of intergenerational transmission due to their “aesthetic, music, and films, see Fig.1). These objects often feature per- historic, scientific, or social value” [16] (see Fig. 1, left). ceptually rich content (e.g., as realistically encoded images While cultural heritage is assembled by every or object representations), and are often linked to further collective—from prehistoric tribes and families to modern contextual information and historical knowledge [20]. These organizations and nations—its professional preservation in rich and heterogeneous data meet diverse user types [21], contemporary times is organized by institutions such as who pursue a variety of tasks [22]. In recent years, this galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (often abbre- complex scenario sparked a wave of InfoVis developments viated as GLAM institutions). Besides preservation, these and approaches within and beyond the confines of academic institutions work on their assets’ documentation and avail- research (see Fig.2). We consider this field of application to ability for research, their mediation to the public, and the deserve closer and more systematic attention, and want to modernization of conservation technologies. In this context, analyze and consolidate its technological achievements from digitization has proven to be one of the most consequen- the InfoVis research point of view. tial innovations. As CH institutions are gradually making From a wider societal perspective, culture is the collective their collections available online, the web is becoming a expression and transmission of valuable contents and prac- large-scale collection of cultural assets and objects itself. tices to ensure their continued existence. As such, we con- Bringing together the entities of countless local collections, sider reflections on the technical aspects and challenges of large meta-aggregators like Europeana1 or the Digital Public this endeavor to have relevance from multiple perspectives: Library of America2 are hosting millions of digital cultural objects, which can be accessed by interested visitors anytime • As a critical process of socio-epistemic reproduction, and anywhere. transmission of culture always requires supportive