Cost and benefit of quality control visual checks in large-scale digitization of archival manuscripts
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-01-2013-0002 |
| Published date | 02 September 2013 |
| Pages | 405-418 |
| Date | 02 September 2013 |
| Author | Joyce Chapman,Samantha Leonard |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Librarianship/library management,Library technology |
Cost and benefit of quality control
visual checks in large-scale
digitization of archival
manuscripts
Joyce Chapman
Library Development, State Library of North Carolina, Raleigh,
North Carolina, USA, and
Samantha Leonard
Media Services, High Point University Libraries,HighPoint,NorthCarolina,USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide much needed data to staff working with archival
digitization on cost and benefit of visual checks during quality control workflows, and to encourage
those in the field of digitization to take a data-driven approach to planning and workflow development
as they transition into large-scale digitization.
Design/methodology/approach – This is a case study of a cost benefit analysis at the Triangle
Research Libraries Network. Data were tracked on time spent performing visual checks compared to
scanning production and error type/discovery rates for the consortial grant “Content, context, and
capacity: a collaborative large-scale digitization project on the long civil rights movement in North
Carolina”.
Findings – Findings show that 85 percent of time was spent scanning and 15 percent was spent on
quality control with visual checks of every scan. Only one error was discovered for every 223 scans
reviewed (0.4 percent of scans). Of the six types of error identified, only half cause critical user
experience issues. Of all errors detected, only 32 percent fell into the critical category. One critical error
was found for every 700 scans (0.1 percent of scans). If all the time spent performing visual checks
were instead spent on scanning, production would have increased by 18 percent. Folders with 100 or
more scans comprised only 11.5 percent of all folders and 37 percent of folders in this group contained
errors (for comparison, only 8 percent of folders with 50 or more scans contained errors). Additionally,
52 percent of all critical errors occurred in these folders. The errors in larger folders represented 30
percent of total errors, and performing visual checks on the large folders required 32 percent of all
visual check time.
Practical implications – The data gathered during this research can be repurposed by others
wishing to consider or conduct cost benefit analysis of visual check workflows for large-scale
digitization.
Originality/value – To the authors’ knowledge, this is the only available dataset on rate of error
detection and error type compared to time spent on quality control visual checks in digitization.
Keywords Quality control,Visual checks, Large-scale digitization,Cost benefit analysis,
Archives management
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction
While large-scale digitization of books has received significant attention in the past
decade (Conway, 2011, p. 304), libraries and archives are also engaging increasingly in
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0737-8831.htm
Quality control
visual checks
405
Received 13 January 2013
Revised 29 January 2013
Accepted 3 February 2013
Library Hi Tech
Vol. 31 No. 3, 2013
pp. 405-418
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0737-8831
DOI 10.1108/LHT-01-2013-0002
To continue reading
Request your trial