ConservationSpace Workflows for CFQ 2July2012.docx

Preliminary ConservationSpace Workflows 2 July 2012

As an initial definition of the need, the Partners developed 27 workflows describing the principal cases in which ConservationSpace will be used and then performed an initial analysis to carefully identify the role of the system in each. Recently, with the assistance of Noblis, the project has begun formal systems analysis, Enterprise Blueprinting, through which it intends to validate this information and make it more precise for inclusion in the eventual RFP. Until this is complete, however, the workflows provide the best basis for understanding the functional scope intended for the system.

W1(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US1-2-18-21 User story:

A conservator, while *NOT* connected to the CMS and to the CS, needs to examine an object for one of the following possible purposes:

· For a possible loan

· For travel for an approved loan

· After returned from loan with or without a possible damage

· For a possible acquisition

· Right after an acquisition

· After an on-site damage occurred

· For a possible treatment Assumptions:

1. The conservator does this at a site where she does NOT have access to either the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) or to Conservation Space (CS).

2. An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist in the Collection System..

3. Previous record may or may not exist in CS.

4. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

5. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

6. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging eventually.

Documents that may need to be created

1. Condition report

2. Travel documents

3. Suggested travel and display arrangements

4. Accident report

5. Treatment proposal Workflow:

1. The conservator will select the template form in CS for the particular purpose of this examination: loan, damage, acquisition, technical study, etc. If the appropriate template does not exist, the conservator/institution will create one. The conservator does this while connected to the CS.

2. The conservator populates this template with data from the CMS if this data exists.

3. The conservator downloads these templates and data to her portable device.

4. The conservator will examine the object and enter condition information and/or technical information into these templates.

5. The conservator may want to take digital images and store them on her computer.

6. The conservator may want to take samples from the object, after arranging permissions, and arrange/contract for scientific testing of these samples. The sample locations will be indicated in CS, probably on an annotated image.

7. When the conservator returns to a place where she has access to CS, she will upload to CS the template form with the pertinent data.

8. If digital images were made, these will be uploaded to the CS and annotated if necessary.

9. If or when the scientific analyses of any samples are available, the conservator will upload/attach these data to the specific files/reports in CS and make the necessary annotations.

10. The conservator will create the necessary documents. She will be able to populate these documents with most of the captured data. If, for whatever reason, the on-site captured data was not automatically transferred (uploaded) into the system, it can still be attached, or copied/pasted into the appropriate document(s)

11. She will print or forward electronically the final report(s)/document(s) to others as necessary.

W2(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US3-4-5-6-7-9-16-17-19-20 User story:

A conservator, while connected to both the CMS and CS, needs to examine an object for one of the following possible purposes:

· For a possible loan

· For travel for an approved loan

· After returned from loan with or without a possible damage

· For a possible acquisition

· Right after an acquisition

· After an on-site damage occurred

· For a possible treatment Assumptions:

7. The conservator does this at the organization’s site while having full system access to both the Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

8. An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

9. Previous record may or may not exist in CS.

10. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

11. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

12. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

6. Condition report

7. Travel documents

8. Suggested travel and display arrangements

9. Accident report

10. Treatment proposal Workflow:

1. The conservator will select the template form in CS for the particular purpose of this examination: loan, damage, acquisition, technical study, etc. If the appropriate template does not exist, the conservator/institution will create one. The conservator might also be able to assemble various information objects in anticipation of a “project” related to this object.

2. The conservator will access any existing information/images on the particular object from the institution’s CMS and DAM and populate the CS record with these data/images.

3. If the object does not have a CMS record, she will have to add any pertinent tombstone data to the CS template chosen in step 1.

4. The conservator will access any paper files/photographs/ scientific data for this object at the institution, and decide which are pertinent to this examination.

5. Any pertinent paper files or photographs will be scanned and attached to the CS record for this object. These will go into image field which can be annotated and will have, at a minimum, title and date metadata. The images are probably linked, but this is a system engineering issue.

6. The conservator will have the object brought to a place where there is a computer that is connected to CS, the CMS and the DAM or go to the object and use a portable device connected to CS, the CMS, and the DAM.

7. The conservator will examine the object and enter condition information and/or technical information into the template/CS.

8. The conservator may want to take or order digital images, annotate them and attach these to the CS record. see last sentence in #5.

9. The conservator may want take samples and/or order scientific analyses for this object, and attach the data to the CS record for this object.

10. Taking samples or ordering scientific analyses may need permissions from others, and these need to be reflected in the CS record for this object. The permissions will be different for each institution and, thus will have to be part of customization.

11. The conservator will create the necessary documents in CS and print or forward electronically to others as necessary for review, comment, editing, and approval. During the report writing, the conservator should be able to leverage documents, images and references in his project area, and coordinate/manage workflow for this project.

12. The conservator may upload new pertinent data/images to the CMS.

W3(EXO)

Workflow to cover user story EXO-US8 User story:

The museum is contacted by a lawyer outside of the institution asking whether an object in the collection could possibly be that claimed by a holocaust victim. The lawyer asks the museum to provide full photographic and written documentation of the object’s condition, materials of manufacture, history of restoration, frame, housing, labels and any other feature that can be used to identify it. The lawyer has asked that the conservator and curator compare the object to photographs of a similar object her client owns and to look for a similar insignia on the reverse of the object. The lawyer has also asked for x-radiographic images and signs of alteration that could have occurred since 1938. The lawyer has asked to view the object and that the conservator’s report be signed and witnessed.

Assumptions:

· The conservator does this at the organization’s site while having full system access to both the Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

· An object record exists in the Registrar Office and in the Collection System.

· Previous record may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

· The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

· The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

13. Condition report – for legal dispute

14. Treatment report – for legal dispute Workflow:

Some metadata fields may be very specific here due to the legal nature. Please try to be specific about the fields you want/need to populate.

1. Conservator reviews all CS, CMS, and analog records for the object.

2. (Optional) Conservator scans and uploads relevant analog documents and photographs to CS and gives them appropriate metadata.

3. Conservator uploads lawyer’s letter(s) or email(s) as well as photographs the lawyer provides to CS and gives all appropriate metadata. Conservator assigns appropriate permissions levels to these documents as a part of this process.

4. (Optional) Conservator creates notes record for object where all relevant observations are recorded during examination of the object and review of documentation.

5. (Optional) Photography and/or x-radiography is requested for the object.

6. (Optional) Conservator carries out photography and/or x-radiography.

7. New digital images are uploaded to CS, annotated, and given appropriate metadata.

8. (Optional) For internal use, the conservator fills in a standard examination report for the object using an existing template on CS, with some fields populated from the CMS.

9. Conservator creates a free text WYSIWYG document to write up full report with all information requested by the lawyer. The document is given a title identifying its purpose. Some images may be embedded in the document to illustrate points. Legal language and signature lines are added to the end of the document. The appropriate permissions level for the document is set.

10. Conservator chooses other images and/or documents in CS to accompany the report and links the images and documents to the report.

11. (Optional) Conservator sends draft report to others in the institution for review and approval. Reviewers add comments to the draft and approvals are recorded in CS.

12. The report is finalized and frozen in CS.

13. Conservator’s report and all images and documents needed to accompany the report are printed out.

14. All necessary parties sign the hard copy of the report.

15. The signed report is scanned, uploaded to CS, and given appropriate metadata, such as when it was created, to whom it was sent, etc.

16. The digital version of the scanned, signed report is emailed to the registrar and/or attached to the CMS record for the object.

17. The signed hard copy of the report and accompanying images are delivered to the lawyer.

18. (Optional) Conservator creates notes record for object where notes on visit from lawyer are recorded for internal use.

W4(EXO)

Workflow to cover user story EXO-US10 User story:

During the course of an examination of an object (for instance, a bound illuminated manuscript) it becomes clear that additional complex imaging (for instance, multispectral imaging) is needed using an external department or an external organization. All resulting images need to be part of the object record.

Assumptions:

· The imaging organization does not have access to any of the CMS or CS records.

· The result of this work needs to be part of the CS records of the object.

· The conservator does have access to both the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

· An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

· Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

· The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

· The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging eventually.

Documents that may need to be created

15. Updated object records

16. Request or work order for scientific analysis

17. Request or work order for imaging

18. Travel/loan documents to send object to imaging facility

19. Condition report

20. Summary report of findings Workflow:

· The conservator searches the CS system to locate existing records for the object.

· If record(s) are found, conservator may copy or annotate existing record/template or

· If no records are found, the conservator selects the appropriate the template form in CS for the particular purpose of this examination: loan, damage, acquisition, technical study, etc. If the appropriate template does not exist, the conservator/institution will create one.

· The conservator populates (hand keys) this template with data from the Registrar’s record or

· The conservator requests that record be created in CMS using Resigtrar’ record. Conservator populates template with data from CMS.

· The conservator will examine the object and enter condition information and/or technical information into these templates.

· The conservator may want to take digital images, upload to DAM and CS, and annotate as needed. This

· (Optional) The conservator may want to take samples from the object, after arranging permissions, and arrange/contract for scientific testing of these samples.

· Conservator enters sample site information into CS and this could be done using image manipulation-annotation

· Conservator creates scientific analysis request

· Conservator sends samples and request to lab

· The conservator generates work request for imaging.

· Conservator selects image request template which allows for multiple images of the same object . Filling in template may automatically create placeholders for images in DAM/CMS.

· Conservator enters imaging sites into CS (page id, locations on page like top-left) and details to be communicated to imaging facility

· Conservator generates imaging request

· Conservator retrieves travel documents from Registrar for the transport of object to facility

· (Optional) When there is no registrar, conservator creates travel manifest/documents for object using CS.

· If or when the scientific analyses of any samples are available, the conservator will select/ upload/attach the data to the specific files/reports in CS.

· If or when the images are available, the conservator will upload/attach these image files to DAM

· The conservator creates final report, compiling data from imaging, photo images, and scientific analysis.

· Conservator submits report for supervisory and/or lab peer review.

· Conservator will print or forward electronically the final report(s)/document(s) to others as necessary.

W5(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US11-12 User story:

We want to capture miscellaneous additional information about an object. For instance

· audio and video from a visit of the artist or of a scholar and attach this info with metadata to the object record.

· Comments of a visiting expert including both technical and non-technical comments.

Assumptions:

21. The conservator does have access to both the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

22. An object record exists in the Registrar Office and in the CMS

23. Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

24. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

Documents that may need to be created

· Updated object records Workflow:

1. The Conservator searches for and finds the object record in CS

· If there is no existing record in CS, the conservator selects or creates the exam template and collects the tombstone data to identify the object.

· If insufficient images of the object exist, conservator may want to add new images of the object to CS

· If insufficient data related to the technical discussion exists in CS, conservator should add comments

2. The Conservator will then upload audio and/or video of visitor and object. This could be in multiple files or clips.

3. The Conservator then adds suitable metadata to the new files (which will be stored on the DAM) and a suitable text-based description regarding the content of audio/video data.

4. If there are specific comments in the audio/video which the conservator wishes to highlight, the conservator could indicate these by giving the time in the clip, or split an audio or video clip into different sections.

5. Conservator links the audio/video data to object record

6. Technical comments from the audio/video clip should be transcribed in a conservation record in CMS.

· Where appropriate, files, notes, and transcriptions should be uploaded on the CMS, especially when content is not exclusively conservation/science related.

W6(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US13-14 User story:

This deals with multi-part objects. Examples:

· We want to enable the conservator to handle a multi-part object examination where we need to generate both a summary report and individual reports for the individual parts. The appropriate form for the individual parts needs to be easily generated, and the critical condition fields of the individual reports needs to be rolled up to the summary report.

· Variable media artworks tend to consist of many different parts – sculptural components, electronic hardware, video masters, exhibition copies, etc. - all of which are catalogued as part records related to a single whole record for the entire artwork. An overall examination and assessment of a variable media artwork involves categorizing the parts of the work and gathering very specific information about the parts. This information needs to be compiled in ConservationSpace. The object record needs the listing of the parts by accession number. To aid in compiling the information and using the spreadsheet document, the user creates hyperlinks in the spreadsheet that are tied to the accession numbers. The user needs to write a prose description and assessment of the work as a whole and assigns a priority rating for video preservation work. The parts report needs to be exported and attached to the whole record for the work in the CMS.

Assumptions:

25. The conservator does have access to both the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

26. An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

27. Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

28. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

29. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

30. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging eventually.

Documents that may need to be created

· Updated object records Workflow:

1. The conservator will select the object key number in CMS or CS.

2. The conservator generates an email request in CS to art handlers asking them to move the collected installation/object in multiple parts to the Conservator’s studio.

3. The installation is unpacked and is inventoried in its parts.

4. The conservator generates condition report (from template) in CS with tombstone data from the CMS.

5. The conservator records the condition of the parts in CS.

6. The conservator takes identification photos of all parts for the condition report in CS.

7. From within the condition report (of the over-all installation/object) the conservator generates a new sub-condition report (from template in CS specific to variable media); to describe the condition of variable media parts (repeated for each part of the installation/object). She may take and annotate photos, and attach them to the condition report in CS.

8. If scientific analysis is necessary, conservator will generate a request, indicating the type of analysis, the position for analysis/sampling etc.

9. The conservator will access any existing information/images on the particular object from the institution’s CMS and DAM and populate the CS record with these data/images.

10. The conservator will access any paper files/photographs for this object at the institution, and decide which are pertinent to the examination.

11. The conservator will consult with the artist(s) as appropriate or needed.

12. The object (multi-part) is installed and all parts are checked for functionality.

13. The conservator generates report “Installation Guidelines” in CS.

14. She writes the report “Installation Guidelines” that is stored in CMS.

15. The conservator generates email request in CS to the museum’s photographers, to photograph the collected installation/object for the CMS.

16. The conservator will upload relevant documentation (artist interview, photos, etc.) to DAM.

W7(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US15-22 User story:

A conservator requests scientific analysis from a scientist for a single object or for a group of objects.

Assumptions:

· The result of this work needs to be part of the CS records of the object.

· The conservator does have access to both the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

· An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist [MMA assumpt. Exist] in the Collection Management System.

· Previous record(s) [mma assumpt. does not exist] may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist. mma assumpt. does not exist]

· The conservator may needs to take photographs and annotate them.

· The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging eventually.

Documents that may need to be created

31. Updated object records Workflow:

1. Conservator has object in their studio/workspace, and is examining it, generating reports in CS with some information populated from CMS.

2. Conservator checks for existing scientific analysis reports for this object and previous conservation records.

o Previous Scientific analysis records are found, not all questions are answered o Answers/previous analysis are integrated into examination reports

· If previous analog or digital analyses and sample locations have not been catalogued in CS they are integrated into CS

3. Conservator decides to investigate analytic questions further based on the examination and previous information found.

4. Conservator will (usually) communicate with scientist to discuss nature of analysis

· Phone, email, in person

· Conservator’s notes from problem-framing discourse with scientist is added to CS.

· Gets approval for analysis

5. Conservator determines whether to take sample themselves, or have scientists take sample, or provide location of testing area.

6. Images are taken, areas of interest/sample sites are annotated in image

7. Conservator or scientist takes samples if required.

8. Samples are provided a unique identifier.

· CS assigns identifier and links identified sample to the object through CS

9. Conservator accesses a form in CS, defined by Scientific Department

10. Conservator completes the form.

· Data from CMS used to populate the form

· Field examples:

§ Tombstone § Date needed § Date requested § Type of information requested (What you’re looking for)

· Both the specifics, and general background on interest § Area to sample/test

· Annotated image attached to form § If sample is provided by conservator, or science will take it § Location/area of test (no sample taken) § Destination of information (catalog, science paper, etc)

11. Conservator submits request

· This action can take place within CS

12. Scientist receives request

· This action can take place within CS

· Scientist receives samples or scientist comes to object to obtain sample.

· If objects is needs to go to scientific department, request for object movement is made

13. Scientist may take picture of area of analysis

· If non-destructive, unique identifier given to area.

14. Analysis is carried out

· Multiple instruments may be used

· Scientist gets raw data back from instrument(s)

· Scientist analyzes/interprets raw data

· Scientist archives/stores raw data

15. Scientist prepares final report(s) either in CS or an accepted platform (e.g. PDF) with access to CS

16. Samples archived

17. Scientist delivers report to CS in case of PDF format, or finalizes/finishes/releases report to conservator or other museum professional

· Notification of completion happens through CS

W8(EXO)

Workflow to cover user stories EXO-US20-EXM-US18 (TRT-US6) User story:

A conservator, who does not have access to CS or the CMS while in the field or off-site, needs to *repeatedly* examine an object or objects for one of the following possible purposes:

· During an extended loan either on-site or off-site

· As part of an ongoing condition check/maintenance procedure (such as outdoor sculpture) Assumptions:

32. An object record exists in the Registrar Office but it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

33. Previous record may or may not exist in CS.

34. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

35. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

36. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis/imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

· Condition report

· Travel documents

· Suggested travel and display arrangements

· Accident report

· Treatment proposal Workflow:

1. If this is not the first time this object needs to be examined, then the conservator will receive a reminder from the CS system or the lending institution for a scheduled re-examination. (See the last step.)

2. The conservator, in the office, while connected to CS, prior to going offline, will select the template form in CS for the particular purpose of this examination: loan, damage, etc. If the appropriate template does not exist, the conservator/institution will create one.

3. The conservator will access any existing information/images on the particular object from the institution’s CMS and DAM and populate the CS record with these data/images.

4. If the object does not have a CMS record, she will have to add any pertinent tombstone data to the CS template chosen in step 2.

5. The conservator will access any paper files/photographs for this object at the institution, and decide which are pertinent to this examination.

6. The conservator downloads the template and the data/images to here portable device.

7. The next three steps, 7,8,9 occur offline. The conservator goes to the remote site and examines the object(s).

8. The conservator enter condition information into CS template. A description of the object is entered, if one does not already exist.

9. The conservator may want to take or order digital images, and store them on her portable device.

10. After obtaining permissions, the conservator may want take samples and arrange/contract for scientific testing of these samples.

11. When the conservator returns to a place where she has access to CS, she will upload the completed/populated template forms with pertinent data to CS.

12. If digital images were made, these will be uploaded to CS and/or the DAM and annotated if necessary.

13. If or when the scientific analyses of any samples are available, the conservator will upload/attach these data to the specific files/reports in CS.

14. The conservator will create the necessary documents. She will be able to populate these documents with most of the captured data. If, for whatever reason, the on-site ,captured data was not automatically transferred (uploaded) into the system, it can still be attached or copied/pasted into the appropriate document(s).

15. The conservator will print or forward electronically the report(s)/document(s) to others as necessary.

16. If this is the first time, then the conservator will create an auto-notification in CS to remind her every month/6-month/year/etc. for the need to re-examine the object.

W9(EXM)

Workflow to cover user stories EXM-US1-2-3-4-5-6-7-9-10-13-14-16 User story:

A conservator, while *NOT* connected to the CMS and to the CS, needs to examine a group of objects for one of the following possible purposes:

· Travel on loan

· After return from loan with or without possible damage

· After an on-site, accidental damage occurred

· Possible damage to a subset of objects

· Publication or technical study

· Determining the best possible storage conditions

· Grant application

· Possible acquisition

· Incoming acquisition

· Possible treatment

· Prioritization of treatment within the subset

Assumptions:

37. The conservator does this survey at a site where she does NOT have access to either the organization’s Collection Management System (CMS) or to Conservation Space (CS).

38. An object record may or may not exist in the Registrar Office and it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

39. Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

40. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

41. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

42. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis and/or imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

· Condition report

· Travel documents

· Suggested travel and display arrangements

· Accident report

· Treatment proposal

· Labels (to be attached to the surveyed objects) Workflow:

The metadata fields may substantially vary depending on the purpose of the examination. Please try to be specific about the forms/fields you want/need to populate.

1. The conservator, in the office, while connected to CS, prior to going offline, will select the template in CS for the particular purpose of this survey examination: loan, damage, acquisition, technical study, etc. If the appropriate template does not exist in CS, the conservator /institution will create one.

2. If any data, such as tombstone data, on the objects exists in the CMS, the conservator populates the templates (through an upload, not manually) with this data while still connected to CS.

3. The conservator downloads the templates and the data to her portable device. If no tombstone date came from the CMS, this will be added at this stage.

4. The conservator will examine the objects and enter condition information and/or technical information into these templates at a site not connected to CS, such as a storeroom, another museum or collector’s house.

5. The conservator may want to take digital images and store them on her portable device/computer.

6. The conservator may want to take samples from the objects, after arranging permissions, and arrange/contract for scientific testing of these samples.

7. When the conservator returns to a place where she has access to CS, she will upload the template forms with pertinent data to CS.

8. If digital images were made these will be uploaded to CS and/or the DAM and annotated if necessary.

9. If or when the scientific analyses of any samples are available, the conservator will upload/attach these data to the specific files/reports in CS.

10. The conservator will create the necessary documents. She will be able to populate these documents with most of the captured data. If, for whatever reason, the on-site captured data was not automatically transferred (uploaded) into the system, it can still be attached, or copied/pasted into the appropriate document(s).

11. The conservator will print or forward electronically the final report(s)/document(s) to others as necessary. Email capability should be integrated into CS.

W10 (EXM)

Workflow to cover user story EXM-US8 User story:

Title: Survey of the condition of collection identified for digital imaging using sampling technique Curator emails Chief Conservator to ask if the condition of a large collection can be assessed for a proposed digitization project. Conservator undertakes a survey of a large group of objects from an archival collection that is part of a large-scale digitization project. The collection has not been surveyed before, but is a high priority for the collection’s curator and is heavily used. A conservator and an intern create a survey tool in CS for the collection. They use a random sampling method using folder numbers, which correspond to individual item listings in the collection’s finding aid. The sample will be a given number of items to achieve the required level of confidence. The examination takes place on-site using a laptop; materials will need to be paged in advance (boxes requested) through Access Services. The final report will be a memorandum with an executive summary, basic chart with % of damage found and extrapolated to the collection as a whole. The report will also include staffing costs and time estimates that may be included in a grant proposal. (The key here is the random sampling aspect.)

Assumptions:

· The conservator does this at the organization’s site while she has no system access either to the Collection Management System (CMS) or to Conservation Space (CS).

· The object records exist in the Registrar Office and they exist in the Collection System.

· Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

· The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

· The conservator may need to request scientific analysis and/or imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

43. Random Sampling Object List

44. Survey terms and assessment guide (definitions of field choices and priority rankings)

45. Data reports, table-format for tabulation and analysis (may be export capability to spreadsheet program)

46. Condition reports, individual objects

47. Final survey report of findings with recommendations

Workflow:

The metadata fields may substantially vary depending on the purpose of the examination. Please try to be specific about the forms/fields you want/need to populate.

· Conservator, while in office and connected to CS, creates a new project for the survey.

· Fields <project id #>, <project name>, <conservator of record>, <project due date>, <project description (free text)>

· Conservator selects objects to be surveyed.

· Option 1: Conservator adds selected objects to project based on predetermined sampling technique not generated by CS).

· Tombstone data is imported from CS if object is already in CS or CMS if object is not found in CS.

· May be used for very large number of objects or collection size

· Option 2: Conservator adds all objects covered by survey to the project in CS.

· Conservator directs CS to create a subset of randomly selected objects from the all objects added to project.

· Fields<desired survey confidence level %>

· May be used for small to medium number of objects or collection size

· Conservator creates survey form in CS

· Conservator selects the template in CS for the particular purpose of this survey examination: condition survey using sample/subset of objects. Template may also reflect object type(s) anticipated in sample or subset.

· If the appropriate template does not exist in CS, the conservator /institution will create one

· Selects or creates appropriate fields:

· Tombstone information:

· <Title>, <Author/Creator>,< Date or Creation/Imprint>; <Collection>; <Accession number/unique ID>; <barcode #>; <permanent location>; <container fields (box, folder)>

· General Description: Object type or class; dimensions; place of origin

· Specific Description: <Material type(s)>; method of production;

· Condition: Object component-specific fields using a defined set of choices (allow for controlled data and later data sorting)

· Scientific analysis (if planned) <sample #>, <sample site>

· Free-form text field -for <notes> not covered by defined choice fields

· Conservator creates individual instances of survey forms based on template for each of the objects in the selected subset

· The conservator pre-populates each record with any tombstone data uploaded from the CMS while still connected to CS.

· If no tombstone data is available for the record, this will be added to the un-populated template (manually keyed in);

· The conservator downloads the survey records with the pre-populated data to her portable device.

· The conservator will examine the objects and enter condition information and/or technical information into these templates at a site not connected to CS, such as a storeroom, another museum or collector’s house.

· The conservator may want to take digital images and store them on her portable device/computer.

· The conservator may want to take samples from the objects, after arranging permissions, and arrange/contract for scientific testing of these samples.

· If samples are taken, images will be annotated with sample locations, and a description of the reason for sampling added to the template.

· When the conservator returns to a place where she has access to CS, she will upload the template forms with pertinent data to CS.

· If digital images were made these will be uploaded to CS and/or the DAM and annotated if necessary.

· If or when the scientific analyses of any samples are available, the conservator will upload/attach these data to the specific files/reports in CS.

· The conservator will generate data report for controlled choice fields and priority rankings and export as table to be manipulated, sorted, and analyzed further.

· The conservator will create the necessary documents, condition reports. She will be able to populate these documents with most of the captured data. If, for whatever reason, the on-site captured data was not automatically transferred (uploaded) into the system, it can still be attached, or copied/pasted into the appropriate document(s).

· The conservator will print or forward electronically the final report(s)/document(s) to others as necessary.

W11(EXM)

Workflow to cover user stories EXM-US11-12-And-Others User story:

A conservator, while connected to both the CMS and CS, needs to examine a group of objects for one of the following possible purposes:

· For possible damage to a subset of the objects

· For a publication or technical study

· For determining the best possible storage condition and apply for grant

· For travel for a subset of objects for an approved loan

· For prioritization of treatment inside the group

· After returned from loan with or without a possible damage

· For a possible acquisition

· Right after an acquisition

· After an on-site, accidental damage occurred

· For a possible treatment Assumptions:

48. The conservator does this at the organization’s site while having full system access to both the Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

49. An object record may or may not exist in the Registrar Office and it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

50. Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

51. Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

52. The conservator may need to take photographs and annotate them.

53. The conservator may need to request scientific analysis and/or imaging.

Documents that may need to be created

· Condition report

· Travel documents

· Suggested travel and display arrangements

· Accident report

· Treatment proposal

· Labels (to be attached to the surveyed objects) Workflow:

The metadata fields may substantially vary depending on the purpose of the examination. Please try to be specific about the forms/fields you want/need to populate.

General

1. Create an examination record for the study multiple objects

· create of a summary report for the project and

· create of a survey template for the project.

2. Define the question/objective for the examination and add a description of the objective to the examination record

3. Search for and select objects to include in study

4. Create new object records for any objects which are not in the CMS

5. Take new images for any objects which have no images and upload the images to CS

6. Retrieve the most recent condition reports/technical studies of the objects

7. Retrieve all images related to the objects

8. Examine objects

9. see specific workflows below

- Damage

· Create new condition reports in CS

· Compare visual examination, notes and previous images with objects to assess for possible damage

· If damage is observed, write this down in new condition report for each object. If not damage is noted, this should be indicated.

· Photograph any damage and add images to CS

· Annotate image with descriptions of damage

· When all objects are examined, indicate the conclusion to the study on the examination record for the study of multiple objects.

Technical study

· Retrieve all existing technical analysis records

· Assess information and determine if new analysis is required

· If no analysis has been done, indicate if new analysis is required

· For analysis, indicate what type of analysis is needed, where it should be carried out, if sampling is required, and indicate suitable sampling locations, analytical parameters, and notes for whomever will be carrying out analysis. Indicate if there is a sequence to follow for analysis (eg. X-ray, IR, Non-invasive, etc.). Upload annotated images for analysis

- New storage conditions

· Examine past technical study and tombstone information for evidence of constituent materials of object

· Indicate what materials are present on the examination record

· Retrieve treatment records for all objects

· Examine past conservation treatment records to determine what materials were used in the past for conservation

· Examine condition reports to indicate if any damage or precarious condition of object may be related to environmental conditions

· Determine (by searching material data sheets, for example), what materials used are sensitive and indicate on the examination records what the recommended storage conditions would be for each object -For travel for a subset of objects for an approved loan

· Examine existing condition reports

· Examine CMS to see if there are any restrictions on loan/travel

· Identify from condition reports the risks which may be associated with the object

· Examine objects to check condition and identify any areas which are at risk

· Photograph/document any additional areas of concern, and upload images and comments to CS

· Indicate if any objects require treatment or analysis prior to loan approval -For prioritization of treatment inside the group/For possible treatment

· Define a scale related to priority for treatment (this could be for example 1-5)

· Examine condition reports and past treatment proposals

· Examine each object visually and update condition reports

· If necessary, take new images and upload them, and annotate them

· Indicate what treatment is recommended

· Score each object on the scale defined in (1) -After returned from loan with or without a possible damage

· Examine Condition reports and images of objects prior to loan

· Examine objects and note any discrepancies

· Take new images if there are noted differences

· If no changes, indicate that no changes are observed -For a possible acquisition/Right after acquisition

· Examine object

· Create new condition report

· Take images

· Indicate if analysis is required and what questions should be addressed by analysis - indicate what type of analysis is required

· Indicate if there are additional questions regarding: conservation/treatment history/authorship/etc.

-After an on-site, accidental damage occurred

· Consult damage report and previous condition reports and photographs

· Examine object and identify areas of damage

· Annotate images and create new condition report

· Take photographs and add to CS with annotations

W12(EXM)

Workflow to cover user story EXM-US15 User story:

Title: Multi-department collaboration and examination of multiple objects An exhibition and catalogue of all works by one artist is being planned. Each work will be thoroughly catalogued and researched, including technical and material studies. This will involve the interaction of curators, conservators and scientists. A survey list will be generated in CS, and each team will include pre-existing or needed information respective to their own field: provenance, bibliography, exhibition history, X-radiography, infrared reflectography, photography, preparatory drawings, materials, techniques, binding and pigment analyses, conservation history. The various contributors should be able to compile, access, and cross-reference all data on CS. (The key issue here is the collaboration aspect of this user story: multiple parties participate and how they need to communicate.)

Assumptions:

· The participants do this at the organization’s site while having full system access to both the Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

· An object record may or may not exist in the Registrar Office and it may or may not exist in the Collection System.

· Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

Documents that may need to be created

· Complex updates to the object records.

Workflow:

54. Survey is generated in CS by the project leader.

55. Tombstone information is drawn from the museum’s CMS (including provenance, bibliography and exhibition history, information on preparatory drawings, materials and techniques).

56. X-radiography, infrared reflectography and photographs are drawn from the museum’s DAM system.

57. Information on binding media and pigment analyses, and conservation history, is typed manually into the survey form by Conservator; in future some (if not all) of this information is expected to be uploaded to and drawn from CS.

58. Any missing information will be added to the respective systems (CMS, DAM etc.) by the responsible parties, and a new survey record will be generated with the updated information.

59. Survey form is ready for distribution - electronically or in printed form.

W13(EXM)

Workflow to cover user story EXM-US17 User story:

A conservator, curator, scientist (or other museum professional or private conservator), in the course of an examination of a group of objects (for acquisition, treatment, preventive conservation, or in general for research purposes) feels the need to conduct scientific tests. A request for analysis will be generated. The request contains tombstone information and a general description of the object and the purpose of the analysis. "analysis" is intended here in a general meaning: the requestor may or may not know the specific tests that should be performed to address his/her needs. In general, the follow-up to the request will be a discussion between requestor and scientist to better define the scope of work. The first step in the actual analysis is a visual examination of the object. The scientist will obtain photographic documentation (new or existing) and annotate it to highlight areas of interest. If non-destructive tests are carried out, areas analyzed will be indicated on the photo documentation. If samples are taken, their original locations should also be noted. Samples may need to be archived. Following this step, analyses will be carried out on a variety of instruments. Each instrument will generate its typical output. Generally, this is going to be in some sort of proprietary format. Data could however be exported in ascii format or as a jpeg or bitmap in the case of spectra and graphs. Finally, a report will be prepared. This is generally a pdf document with graphics embedded.

Assumptions:

· The conservator does this at the organization’s site while having full system access to both the Collection Management System (CMS) and to Conservation Space (CS).

· The object records exist in the Registrar Office and they exist in the Collection System.

· Previous record(s) may or may not exist in CS.

· Previous paper/analog records, photographs may or may not exist.

· Scientist is in-house and has access to CS.

Documents that may need to be created

60. Updated object records Workflow:

1. Conservator has group of objects in their studio/workspace, and is examining them, generating reports in CS with some information populated from CMS.

2. Conservator checks for existing scientific analysis reports for these objects and previous conservation records.

· Previous Scientific analysis records are found, not all questions are answered

· Answers/previous analysis are integrated into examination reports

· If previous analog or digital analyses and sample locations have not been catalogued in CS they are integrated into CS

3. Conservator decides to investigate analytic questions further based on the examination and previous information found.

4. Conservator will (usually) communicate with scientist to discuss nature of analysis

· Phone, email, in person

· Conservator’s notes from problem-framing discourse with scientist is added to CS.

· Gets approval for analysis

5. Conservator determines whether to take sample themselves, or have scientists take sample, or provide location of testing area.

6. Images are taken, areas of interest/sample sites are annotated in image

7. Conservator or scientist takes samples if required.

8. Samples are provided a unique identifier.

· CS assigns identifier and links identified sample to the object through CS

9. Conservator accesses a form in CS, defined by Scientific Department

10. Conservator completes the form.

· Data from CMS used to populate the form

· Field examples:

§ Tombstone § Date needed § Date requested § Type of information requested (What you’re looking for)

· Both the specifics, and general background on interest § Area to sample/test

· Annotated image attached to form § If sample is provided by conservator, or science will take it § Location/area of test (no sample taken) § Destination of information (catalog, science paper, etc)

11. Conservator submits request

· This action can take place within CS

12. Scientist receives request

· This action can take place within CS

· Scientist receives samples or scientist comes to object to obtain sample.

· If objects need to go to scientific department, request for object movement is made

13. Scientist may take picture of area of analysis

· If non-destructive, unique identifier given to area.

14. Analysis is carried out

· Multiple instruments may be used

· Scientist gets raw data back from instrument(s)

· Scientist analyzes/interprets raw data

· Scientist archives/stores raw data

15. Scientist prepares final report(s) either in CS or an accepted platform (e.g. PDF) with access to CS

16. Samples archived

17. Scientist delivers report to…