ger
Date: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:41 am ((PDT))
Here are some interesting links regarding BWAV files and metadata
http://cool.conservation-us.org/byform/mailing-lists/arsclist/2005/03/msg00=
1
Message: 34.
Subject: html
Attempt to standardize that use of metadata fields within the BWAV format
etc.
http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/audio-visual/
It appears that Soundminer V4pro has the capabilities that a lot of us are
looking for but $899 US is just too steep an entry point for most of us.
http://www.soundminer.com/SM_Site/V4.html
Wil Hershberger
<http://www.natureimagesandsounds.com/> Nature Images and Sounds, LLC
Hedgesville, WV
<http://www.songsofinsects.com/> The Songs of Insects
<http://cricketman.blogspot.com/> My Blog
From:
On Behalf Of Wil Hershberger
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2010 8:04 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [Nature Recordists] from metadata to archiving
I would have to say that having the data about the recording IN the metadat=
a
of the file itself is very important. If the link is broken between the fil=
e
and the xml file (or whatever external file) then all is lost. If all the
data is in the metadata of the actual wav file then it can't get lost. Ther=
e
should be a way to batch edit this metadata and have and external
application that can read the same metadata into a database. Results in the
best of both worlds, all the data is safe in the wav file and there is an
external database of all the data for quick searching.
There is a great deal of effort in the federal government to standardize th=
e
fields to be used within the wav file format as well as what xml or iXML
fields to setup for sidecar files. I will try to find the pertinent links.
Wil Hershberger
<http://www.natureimagesandsounds.com/> Nature Images and Sounds, LLC
Hedgesville, WV
<http://www.songsofinsects.com/> The Songs of Insects
<http://cricketman.blogspot.com/> My Blog
From:
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Steve Pelikan
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 11:29 PM
To:
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] from metadata to archiving
Yes Rob, I agree 100% that it'd be nice to have all this
extraction/consolidation/im/exporting of data done automatically.
My point was that even with that nifty technology available we still need t=
o
get people to record important data. And I think that's a much bigger
problem than the software issue by far. It is hard and time consuming and i=
t
has to be done with thought and accurately to be worthwhile. All this is
from the perspective of archiving for someone else's eventual use or for
historical value of the audio data, not the recordist's convenience.
Also as you say, there's also no doubt (say we develop a great template for
data) that it'll end up getting dumped in a data base of some sort --- and
I'd bet over 90% of people's use of it would be satisfied with a flat sprea=
d
sheet functionality.
I also agree with you that there isn't tremendous day-to-day need for the
metadata data to be included in a file with the audio data itself, if that'=
s
what you're saying. Especially if people have been careful about naming
audio files in a unique way.
But there's a reason that museums insist that all collection data goes on a
label attached directly to a specimen --- otherwise any accident that break=
s
the link between accession data and specimen makes the specimen essentially
worthless. So from the perspective of long term value and archiving for
other's eventual use, if I had a choice, I'd say add an extra block to the
bwav/riff/whatever/ files and put the data there.
Best!
Steve P
--- In
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , Rob Danielson <>
wrote:
>
> Hi Steve--
> You're going to be typing high quality data because that's the kind
> of recordist/guy you are. If your going to have a template to "store"
> and use, you need a full fledged-database. The template you use for
> your DB "records" will allow you to discriminate things I'd never
> think of,.. And you'll build that template out a basic template that
> we'll have after the interlinked apps are in beta.
>
> Question. Would you like being able to add your high quality info for
> your database at the same time you log, make excerpts and add
> reliable "automatic" stuff like place, date, basic weather globally?
> I'm saying use the time stamp from your SD, use the GPS info when
> that becomes norm but add everything else in the consolidation app.
> (Those with less sophisticated recorders can add the time stamp in
> the consolidation app). Your java code/function can go into the
> database.
>
> I'm not seeing a use for data "attached" to a sound file once its
> extracted by the consolidation app and related to everything else in
> a database. Help me! I must be overlooking some need that others are
> seeing. Rob D.
>
> =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D
>
> At 2:19 AM +0000 4/22/10, Steve Pelikan wrote:
> >Friends:
> >
> >I agree that one could/should construct
> >free/cross-platform/easy-to-use software for manipulation of
> >metadata. I'll share all my java library code and python scripts
> >with anyone who wants to do it.
> >
> >But I think the real problem is much closer to what Vicki was saying
> >a few messages back: people actually need to take the time and
> >exercise care and understanding to produce good documentation and
> >metadata. This can't really be done automatically.
> >
> >Even high res and high tech fixes won't do, I'm afraid. As an
> >example, consider something simple like a recording of a single
> >bird's song: maybe GPS and chronometer data that's automatically
> >recorded say when and where to milliseconds and meters. But was the
> >bird identified by sight or could it be a mimic? Was it an adult or
> >immature? Male or female? What was it doing while making the sounds?
> >What conspecifics were present? Where thate predators around? Or
> >prey? etc. etc. None of this could be logged automatically ---
> >someone has to notice it, know it is significant, and record/enter
> >it.
> >
> >And of course the potential questions to be answered about a
> >"soundscape" are this multiplied many times over.
> >
> >So I think discussing software is fine --- I even wrote some a while
> >back for my own use --- but the real issue is spreading an
> >understanding of the importance of such ancillary data and
> >encouraging each other to make ever better efforts at recording and
> >preserving it.
> >
> >If we were going to do anything high tech at all here I'd propose we
> >work towards developing a template ( perhaps an XML format (DTD or
> >schema)) we could all use to record all the significant facts about
> >a cut. Anyone implementing a metadata manipulation program would
> >benefit from such a standardization and in the mean time we could
> >all work towards including all the important data in our
> >documentation in some "exportable" form.
> >
> >--- just my $0.02 worth
> >
> >Steve P
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
>
|