Tag Archives: NYCDH Week

Fair Use in the Digital Humanities

Like many of my colleagues, I attended the “Fair Use in the Digital Humanities workshop”.  It was very similar to a workshop that I attended last year, so I am posting a link to my notes on that event: https://dhintro2020.commons.gc.cuny.edu/fair-use-for-non-fiction-authors-workshop/.

I was not able to register for any of the other NYCDH workshops.  However, I did take a workshop produced by the Mina Rees Library: “Citations To and Citations From: Following the Scholarly Conversation” workshop.  Jill Cirasella was the presenter and her slides may be found here: http://bit.ly/gc-citations-2021.

As a person who comes from a non-academic background, I find the culture and practices of academia fascinating.  In this presentation, we learned how citations in a person’s writing and the writing of others, can be seen/used as an asynchronous conversation between scholars.  While scholars can (and do) use social media platforms like Twitter, when it comes to building a formal conversation, this is done by citing people in your work.  The practice allows us to build on the work of others, and in turn, may bring our own work into the greater conversation.  When you see the hashtag #scholcomm, it refers to this formal system of scholarly communication.

Scholars who seek funding may find that academic institutions and grant-funding bodies favor work that is heavily cited.  There are several mechanisms that can be used to track citations.  Google Scholar is the best know.  It makes an effort to count links to every scholarly article visible on its platform but does not allow users to see all those link-backs, so it may overcount.  More targeted platforms, like Web of Science, only show link-counts within their disciplines but are transparent in terms of the link-backs.

 

Digital Documentation Process (DDP) Workshop at NYCDH

I attended the Digital Documentation Process (DDP) workshop with Laura Morreale from Fordham University at NYCDH last week. The DDP exists as a method to standardize documentation for digital projects which can aid both in preservation and cataloguing. Our presenter encouraged us to think of DH projects and exhibits as performances rather than “products,” in that they can be more like events or shows that are being presented that have some type of artifact of their having happened such as a playbill or cast recording or staff credit sheet. Therefore the DDP does not replicate the viewer experience of the project itself but serves as an official record of its existence.

There are three documents that make up the “ingredients” of the DDP: the catalog record, the persistent identifier, and the archiving dossier narrative. The catalog record is a document that contains all of the metadata associated with the project for the purposes of cataloguing it into a searchable database such as Google Scholar (if self-archiving) or a library catalog (if associated with an institution). The persistent identifier contains all of the project’s files in their most durable file formats in a repository that is accessible by a DOI (digital object identifier), and therefore can be searched by others. The archiving dossier or dossier narrative acts like a bio for the project and its collaborators, listing their involvement, the story and scope of the project, along with its URLs and other narrative details.

The persistent identifier DOI (digital object identifier) was a bit challenging for me to understand but we walked through the process of obtaining one for self-archiving purposes using the digital archival tool, Zenodo. In Zenodo, we were able to reserve a D.O.I. because they “give them out for free,” and as a group we briefly speculated about how and why they are able to do this. One leading theory was that since Zenodo is an EU state-funded project that they have the resources to issue them. I checked DOI.org after the workshop and they also listed many additional registration agencies in the event that Zenodo is not an option in the future.

When we archived the sample project using Zenodo and associated the DOI with the project files, we would then be able to access the project through the DOI in the future. This process was useful for self-archiving (ie a project without institutional support). It was also recommended to archive in multiple repositories online as a best practice in digital archival methods such as Humanities Commons and OpenDOAR. If a project is institutionally supported or adjacent, it was also suggested that one should send the files to the institutional archive. In any repository, the project files should be archived in their most durable file formats, whatever those may be.

The dossier narrative was a persistent part of the discussion, as it adds collaboration details for DH projects which can otherwise be confusing to those not as familiar. With a dossier, the collaborator who worked on data for example can be credited with that work uniquely, as can the collaborator who wrote text descriptions or more traditionally “scholarly” outputs. The dossier can also be an area where the scope of work can be explained to those not as familiar with the unique methods and constraints of digital projects. These characteristics have impacts on searchability, fellowships, and which collaborators have access to tenure, etc, so the dossier narrative becomes a critical addition to the DDP.

This simple three document process began to seem overwhelming with its many potential fields to consider & fill out, so I was very pleased to receive both the slides, as well as a link to the DDP website that details the process. This site has a few “wizard” style forms that can aid the DDP process from the inception of a digital project to the archival of an inactive project, which others may find useful as well.

Bianca’s magical NYCDH mystery tour–Exploring City Narratives & Omeka

I attended NYCDH three workshops: Exploring City Narratives, and Intro & Advanced Omeka.  The first gave me an overview of an innovative mapping project from beginning to near completion; the second and third introduced me to Omeka as a tool, got me excited to set up an account and a site, and then overwhelmed me with possibilities and once again reminded me that I need to get better at HTML.

PENNY (LENIN) LANE

Exploring City Narratives with the Elements of Gamification

(Cultural Memory, Gamification, Mapping, Mobile App)

Organized by Antonina Puchkovskaia and Lada Zimina (ITMO, St. Petersburg, Russia)

https://st-retrospect.dh-center.ru/en

Based at the State research university ITMO, Que.St/St.Retrospect, is both an ongoing educational project (with over 60 students having participated in the class) and mobile app/gaming site aimed at young adults experiencing St. Petersburg as students or tourists.  It tracks landmarks, historical figures, and cultural events to provide a “multidimensional memory” of how the city has changed over time.  The site will allow the user to choose what moment and element of the urban landscape on which to focus.  Games like “Help Dostoevsky Publish His First Novel” and “Drink Like a Writer pub crawl” provide an incentive and a route for discovering St. Petersburg’s contested past.

The presentation walked us through the various challenges the developers have faced: the shift from Machine Learning to manual annotation; negotiations with cultural institutions over shared data; the particular difficulties with bringing the site public as an app; and the problems of double labelling, providing symbols for institutions whose functions have shifted or identification for street names that record the particular ideological demands of varying eras.

Overall, I learned a huge amount about how one might imagine urban space through digital humanities.  The presenters generously shared how they constructed their teams, what front & back end and data storage solutions they had found, and encouraged us to have our own students provide UX/UI feedback when they launch later this spring.

HELLO, GOODBYE (OMEKA)

Introduction to Omeka workshop

Organized by Kimon Keramidas (NYU)

https://www.omeka.net/

I loved the Introduction to Omeka: Kimon Keramidas explained the origins and the current capacities of the site very clearly, distinguishing what makes it so appealing and easy to use and why one might choose it over WordPress for example, depending on a particular project’s goals (textbox vs item eg).

He also led us through the various “affordances” of digital platforms in general for scholarly work, the pros and cons of Omeka in particular, and the differences between Omeka.net and Omeka Classic/Omeka.org (see below).  We then looked at a number of sites, watched him demonstrate how to add an item and navigate the site in various ways, and learned a number of trouble-shooting options.

Throughout, the workshop engaged theoretical issues in DH as well as the basics of using the Omeka.net site, making the event both an encouraging prelude to playing around for oneself and an opportunity to think about the production and representation of “materiality” in a digital context.

THE FOOL ON THE HILL or I AM THE WALRUS (not the tool-using primate)

Advanced Omeka workshop

The Introduction made Omeka so simple-seeming and appealing that I naively signed up for the Advanced workshop the next day and promptly started floundering.  Nonetheless, Keramidas again used the opportunity to explain basic concepts (i.e. LAMP) and walked us through the types of customization available through Omeka Classic/Omeka.org clearly enough so I could conceive of what he was doing, even if I couldn’t replicate it.  While I will stick to creating sites via the on-line prototypes for now, it was helpful to begin to grasp how I could adapt the platform to better serve specific scholarly projects and represent complex artifacts.

NYCDH: Reducing Our Digital Carbon Footprint

My work schedule prevented me from attending all the sessions I wanted, but last week I had the pleasure of attending Alicia Peaker’s workshop, ‘Reducing Your Digital Carbon Footprint’. Right from the start she the tone as a welcoming and calm space for us to interact and ask questions. She had us think about digital as material by closing our eyes and imagining how information is presented to us on our machines. In our minds we traced the path of wires at the bottom of oceans or buried underground that carry packets of information that are then reassembled on the screen. We also contributed tech terms that are derived from nature: flow, trunk, harvest, mining, web, branch, cloud, environment. I had never really paid much attention to this trend, but now my ear perks up every time I hear one.

 

Our discussion around the fact that even wireless is limited was particularly engaging. We live in a time where everyone wants faster, more immediate and convenient technology. Processors have to increase their power over time to keep up with this demand. But the faster they are and the harder they work, the more heat they emit. There’s an emerging idea to place data centers in the Arctic or underwater to help offset some of this heat, but that just introduces new problems. And doesn’t really solve the issue in the first place. Plus, it makes me anxious to think that we’re running out of space for these and have to resort to abusing already at risk areas. I had not given much consideration to how much impact digital tech has on land until this conversation. The discussions in the group made my digital footprint feel much more grounded and physically real, rather than just an imaginary cloud floating above my head.

 

I happened to be partnered up with Allison for our breakout room to share how we feel we can move forward with all of this information. She shared her experience with working with others to help recycle and properly dispose of electronic parts. Old phones, chargers, wires, etc. are too often just thrown in with normal garbage because people don’t take the time to research proper recycling guidelines or don’t have access to those guidelines, thus polluting landfills and injecting hazardous waste into the Earth. Really important contribution, Allison!

 

As someone interested in environmental and sustainability issues, this workshop only added to my knowledge in this area. Especially with a focus on our online selves. I was left feeling a little overwhelmed and helpless after hearing some staggering facts about the pressures that internet usage places on our planet, but also ready to share this info out with my network to hopefully get people to learn and understand that internet usage isn’t unlimited and that faster streaming and more cloud storage has real impact on Earth’s resources. And also explain that we should all feel privileged to have access to this digital carbon footprint we’re contributing to whether or not we realize it.

 

Alicia left us with the ability to stay in touch through the #envirohumanities channel in the DH Slack community. We also have access to a comprehensive Zotero library of resources to explore more about this subject. I’m particularly interested in researching more about mining bitcoin as I hear that requires large energy levels. What are those long term impacts on the environment? I’m inspired and eager to learn more!

NYCDH-Week Reflection Hybrid Teaching: Tips, Tricks, and (Productive) Fails

NYCDH-Week Reflection Hybrid Teaching: Tips, Tricks, and (Productive) Fails

As a student of Digital Pedagogy here at the Graduate Center, my decision to attend yet another teaching workshop should come as no surprise to you! The session was led on Friday at Feb 12th at 3pm by Marina Hassapopoulou, an Assistant Professor of Cinema Studies at NYU and she put together an amalgam of tips, tricks and new platforms with the centralized goal of aiding hybrid teaching environments. As a an adjunct teacher of sorts for over a decade, I was really impressed with the amount of new content she had to offer us. Not only did she share some interesting new software platforms to share our virtual trainings on (some of which I will detail below), she also gave us some great analog teaching ideas that don’t involve the computer at all! I thought I would highlight two of the items that really caught my attention in this session that could support us in our collaboration with each other in our praxis course:

Thinglink: Thing link allows you to take still images and annotate or link portions of the image to additional learning (or any form of media) content. When the student hovers their cursor over the part of the image that contains the linked item, a small pop-up appears which offers the opportunity to ‘learn more’. This tool clearly allows for greater interactivity between students and content that’s hosted online, but that’s also the draw back at the same time. To be clear, your media has to be hosted online somewhere for this to work. Although this platform is free for students with a teacher account, it does beg the question of where teachers host their own content. Teachers will also need to pay for an account but their students may join your Thinglink page for free.

DebateGraph: The other most notable platform (at least for me!) was Debate Graph, which is basically free digital mind mapping software. Again, the opportunities seem endless with this one but what I loved most about it is that you can really clarify ideas or arguments with it in a meaningful, interactive and FREE way! It’s a little old school looking and that in itself felt intimidating to invest my time in, but I am super excited to check this one out as well.

There were at least a dozen different sites mentioned in this session similar to the ones I’ve detailed above and some of them any GC student would already know about. For example, hypothes.is was mentioned and I think we all know by know that it’s great for collaborative annotating and shared reading experiences. I strongly encourage everyone to take a look at the link of teaching resources to discover more on their own that the professor kindly shared to attendees. The last thing I will share is that she gave us some really practical tips for keeping students engaged from their desk space at home. For example, she offered us ideas about taking virtual field trips within students homes, we revisited the old concept of show and tell and even sharing physical drawings on pieces of paper. It reminded me that using our hands off of a mousepad and a keyboard can still be possible in these pandemic days!

NYCDH: Fair Use and Eileen Gray Exhibition

I was not able to attend any of the hands-on technical workshops offered by NYCDH so I’m grateful to others who have posted useful information on what I missed. However, I did attend two enlightening and thought-provoking events which I’ve summarized below.

Fair Use in the Digital Humanities

I learned so much from this “crash course on fair use”. Jill Cirasella did a wonderful job making the information accessible and engaging. She stressed she is not a lawyer and I know even less about the law so learning about the argument of “transformativeness” was extremely helpful in thinking about DH projects. So, if we use materials and transform them to create new information, new aesthetics, new insights and understanding, then these activities enrich society and are within the fair use doctrine. Archives come to mind, either working with historical records, or preservation of contemporary events. Jill outlined a few very important court cases to explain fair use. One was a case against Betamax (hello 1980s!), questioning whether the machines infringed on copyrights when they record tv broadcasts. SCOTUS declared that a private recording of a broadcast in real-time is fair use. The other case involved the song “Pretty Woman” by 2 Live Crew (hello 1990s!) The song relies heavily on Roy Orbison’s song tune. SCOTUS ruled that the 2 Live Crew song can be considered parody so falls within fair use. Parody is transformative because it adds something new to the work. This case has many implications for entertainment and comedy. The last case is very much related to DH. The Authors Guild argued that Google Books and HathiTrust should not be allowed to digitize books and make them searchable. The courts decided that the search function is transformative! Of course, when thinking about our own projects, there are alot of factors to consider such as limitations to fair use, contractual restrictions and personal relationships with an estate. This fair use checklist is very helpful for reference. 

Fun Fact: Every January 1 is Public Domain Day where a new group of works becomes available in the U.S. public domain. Usually this is 75 years but some works have their copyright extended to 95 years. So, this year, works from 1925 entered the public domain!

Bringing Eileen Online: Reimagining Bard Graduate Center’s Eileen Gray Exhibition during the Pandemic

Having worked in exhibitions, both online and offline, I was interested in this presentation and how the pandemic will impact and challenge exhibitions going forward. Jesse Merandy, Director of Digital Humanities and Digital Exhibitions at Bard Graduate Center and Emma Cormack, Associate Curator explained in detail the process of bringing the Eileen Gray exhibition online after the lockdown. The digital exhibition tries to emulate the gallery experience while also providing tools that physical spaces can’t offer such as zooming capabilities. This negotiation between the physical and the digital is very interesting. This living, digital extension has many benefits – different audiences outside of NY have access, more information and context can be presented which the viewer can read at their own pace, new voices can contribute to the scholarship rather than solely the curator’s voice. However, I don’t think it can replace the in-person museum/gallery experience. Rather, both experiences must be integrated and have unique features. This project proves that it is possible for a museum to shift its priorities, in fact, they must be flexible to work in these difficult times. 

Quick tech note: the website was entirely built with WordPress and some plugins. BGC plans to use this template going forward. Unfortunately, the website is not ADA compliant but Jesse emphasized that he is working diligently to make this a priority going forward.

“Transformed” by NYCDH Week

For NYCDH week, I attended the Fair Use workshop (Transformed, I’m Sure) presented by Jill Cirasella, who gave a really compelling and informative presentation on the history of copyright, fair use, and where the reasonable boundaries of a DH project might be with regard to fair use. I thought this workshop was super interesting, especially because it falls into the one of the many Venn diagrams of my interests: law, academics, and transformative works.

Jill truly went above and beyond in keeping the audience engaged, and I especially loved that she used the Grinch’s too-small heart growing in size as a comparison to case precedent allowing the expansion of the fair use clause. The presentation itself was incredibly comprehensive, covering the “letter of the law” in addition to the spirit of it. I also thought it was great that the presentation was centrally focused on the idea of transformative works, because in a lot of ways, that’s what we do when we work with data—we transform it into a narrative, asking questions about it and working with it to obtain answers.

Coming into the presentation, I actually already knew a lot of the case precedent that Jill cited, but I still learned something new—I didn’t know that the World Intellectual Property Organization recognizes indigenous law supremacy, which was absolutely fantastic to hear. Many countries, including the US, are notoriously bad at respecting indigenous people’s rights, so to have a major international governing body actually acknowledge that supremacy feels like a big deal.

One thing I wish we could have seen from the presentation is the role of Disney’s lobbying power in expanding the length of the public domain—I know it’s not necessarily within the scope of how we can work with fair use in the digital humanities, but as an aside in the presentation, it would have been great to show how arbitrary public domain lengths are.

If my group was working with Spotify data (for example), I’d probably be a little more concerned about fair use and copyright law in our project and go through the really helpful fair use checklist Jill provided, but because SCOTUS data is (by nature of the necessity for transparency in US government) public, we likely won’t need to do this. However, if against all odds we find that our work goes so smoothly that we might expand our scope to include papers by constitutional law scholars, then we might have to go through the checklist. Whatever the case, I’m really glad I attended this workshop—knowing the full extent of your rights with regard to copyright law is a great asset to have while working with all sorts of data!

NYCDH Week – Workshop FOMO Edition

Last week was pretty busy, but in a good way. It was a combination of studying, preparing to pitch my project, and of course NYCDH Week (and a CUNY Library workshop, and an ITP workshop). I wasn’t able to attend in 2020, so this year I ended up overcompensating and RSVPing to as many workshops as I could. It was a lot of information and it ended up being a little overwhelming, but thank goodness I took notes and got some good ideas for the NYC Community Fridges Archive!

NYCDH Kickoff Event

I attended the second part of the event, the one with the Graduate Student Award Ceremony. I got to learn about so many interesting projects (all winners were from CUNY GC, yay!), but the one who impressed me the most was Daniel Fox’s “Is There Gender Bias in the Genre Labels for Musicians on Wikipedia?”. Gender Bias on Wikipedia is such an interesting topic, and I never considered it as far as music is concerned. Daniel used data analysis tools to research the genre labels associated with musicians and found out that yes, there are some differences in the way artists of different genders are treated.

Network Analysis for the Humanities

I have to admit, I was a little intimidated by the title of this workshop. Network analysis sounds like a very complicated topic, and my academic career is 100% in the Humanities. Fortunately, the instructor (Dr. Riva) kept the workshop simple enough that we could all intuitively understand what he was talking about. He uses Network Analysis to study the texts that are copied in different Medieval manuscripts: pretty cool if you ask me!

The workshop also included a hands-on part: first, we were divided into breakout rooms and asked to browse (https://moviegalaxies.com/): the website contains network graphs of the characters of several famous movies. I got to chat about Titanic, The Matrix, The Lord of the Rings, and more with students from all over the world (even Abu Dhabi!). I strongly recommend trying it: it makes it wayyy easier to understand movies with a lot of characters, like The Godfather! Dr. Riva also guided us in a tutorial to create a network graph on Gephi. It reminded me a little of Tableau, but more basic and less intuitive to use.

Network analysis of Pulp Fiction on Moviegalaxies.com

Collecting Twitter Data for Research

I was really excited about this workshop because I had seen some interesting text analysis projects based on Twitter Data during prof. Rhody’s class and I wanted to know how to use the Twitter API. Our instructor gave us a tutorial on how to use TAGS Explorer and RStudio Cloud to collect and analyze Twitter data. I was really impressed at how easy it was to use TAGS, but I got a little lost in the RStudio part…I’ll have to go back to the class materials and try that again. The fact that I was devouring a bunch of Indian food during the tutorial might have contributed to my getting lost.

photo of Elena's messy desk with a Mac, a Lamp, a water bottle, notebooks, and a lot of Indian food

Introduction to Omeka and Advanced Omeka

These are the workshops I was most interested in: Omeka is a fundamental component of my team’s project. Kimon Kiramidas guided us through the affordances of Omeka and the different kinds of projects one can create on the platform. In the advanced class, we learned how to use the plugins and themes, which are the way you can tailor Omeka to your project. I also got to ask a couple of questions I had about the NYC Community Fridges Archives: how can you collaborate in Omeka? What about accessibility? The instructor’s answers reassured me: 1) it’s super easy to collaborate on Omeka and you can establish different layers of participation 2) Accessibility is not necessarily built-in, but can be implemented with the use of Themes.

NYCDH Week: Intro to Hypothesis, Manifold, and Palladio

This past week I was able to attend three different workshops for NYCDH Week, introducing me to three very different tools and platforms: Hypothesis, Manifold, and Palladio. This was my first time taking part in the event. Even considering Zoom fatigue, I loved that these workshops happened via video as it meant I could attend many more sessions than I think I could have if they were in person at locations all across the city.

Hypothesis

The Introduction to Hypothesis Web Annotation workshop was led by Alex Gil (@elotroalex), the digital scholarship librarian at Columbia University Libraries. Hypothesis is a tool that allows annotation of any webpage. You can annotate publicly (for anyone who has Hypothesis to view), or you can create private groups so only members of the group see the annotations. It is free to use and built with open-source technology. All of your annotations are saved to their cloud. There is a paid version where they will work with your institution so the information is saved to your own servers, but this workshop focused on the free version. As it is open-source, you could also build your own site and integrate the Hypothesis code directly into it.

Hypothesis adds a layer to the webpage you want to annotate; it does not alter the content on the webpages. You can access it via browser extension, or you can add “via.hypothes.is/” before the URL of the page you want to annotate. Their development team is working toward enabling annotation of images, but at the moment Hypothesis annotates text. They do have an Optical Character Recognition workflow so you can turn images of text (e.g., scanned PDFs) into readable/annotatable text.

The Hypothesis interface is relatively intuitive (see their tutorial on Annotation Basics), and it’s very fun to use. We’re using this tool for another one of my classes this semester, and I’ve found it to be a very useful way of having conversations about the readings outside of the dedicated class time (especially in this time of virtual learning). You can also add images, gifs, and videos in your annotations. And you can add tags to your annotations as a way to keep your notes organized. For instance if you were annotating with a class, you could agree to use “question” as tag to alert the professor you have a question to ask them. As you create an account with an email address, when someone responds directly to your annotation you get an email notification.

You can be in many groups, but it is very easy to accidentally post your annotations to the wrong group. Unfortunately there is no way to move your annotations from one group to another; the only fix is to redo it. The other caveat is that if the webpage you’re annotating is taken down, all of your annotations will be lost along with it. There is a way to download your citations if you want to back them up, but this will only represent your notes as they existed when you downloaded them. There is also the ability to share your annotations, or a specific annotation, directly to other sites (such as Twitter).

Alex suggested this tool could be used for web-based DH project development for the team to collectively comment on functionality and content, which I thought might be beneficial to some of our project-building this semester. Here is an example of a team who used Hypothesis in the creation of their DH project: The Caribbean Digital & Peer Review: A Musical Passage Hypothesis. Alex has also successfully used the tool in a virtual conference, as an alternative to synchronous video conferencing.

Manifold

The Introduction to Manifold Scholarship was led by Robin Miller (@robin_r_miller), an open educational technologist and librarian at The CUNY Graduate Center (GC), and Wendy Barrales (@WendyBarrales), a Manifold graduate fellow at the GC. Manifold is a completely open-source publishing platform. The platform was created by the University of Minnesota Press and the GC. Anyone can download the code for free and create their own “instance” of Manifold. The CUNY instance of Manifold promotes open educational resources, with all texts being openly licensed or made available by the creators. It is free for anyone in the CUNY community to publish on Manifold, and the publication of student work is encouraged.

The platform allows for the publication of dynamic texts, with the ability to embed multimedia resources. It also has a built-in Hypothesis-like annotation tool which allows you to create public and private reading groups. When creating a new project, Manifold offers very customizable layouts. You can include resource pages and tools, as well as pull in social media feeds based on hashtags. The platform has dynamic screen sizing and is optimized for mobile use. The publication page you create is crawled by search engines, so you can optimize your content for this. You can enable epub options so that content is easily downloaded, improving access for people with limited internet connectivity.

Manifold is a publishing platform only, not an authoring one. You create your project by “ingesting” (uploading) the text such as an EPUB from Project Gutenberg, Google doc, Word docx, Markup, or HTML. Manifold speaks HTML, so you may have to tinker with non-HTML texts to preserve your desired formatting. If you have to make any changes to the text, you have to make them in your file and re-ingest. If you re-ingest the same file, Manifold will recognize the changes and implement them quickly. If you need to make changes after your text has been annotated by readers, any annotations associated with the previous version may be lost, depending on how extensive the changes are.

Here are some additional links about Getting Started with Manifold and the CUNY Manifold Maker Guide.

Palladio

The Mapping with Palladio workshop was led by Caterina Agostini (@CateAgostini), a PhD candidate at Rutgers University. Palladio is a free mapping tool created by humanities scholars at Stanford. It’s best application is in mapping correspondence and points of arrival and departure and tracking connections.

After uploading your data, you can visualize it through a map, as well as through graphs, tables, and galleries (if you have images associated with the data points). This tool only allows you to create visualizations; there is no way to save your visualizations, except through screenshots. If you exit the application, you will lose all of your visualizations. The data upload is a bit buggy. For instance, when uploading data with special characters (e.g., in names), there is some manual work that needs to be done for the program to recognize it. The tool is also limited in that you cannot indicate directionality in your connecting lines (e.g., the “from” to the “to” in correspondence or the “departure” to the “arrival” in travel).

Here is a write-up from Miriam Posner on Getting Started with Palladio, in which she specifies how to decide if the tool could be right for your visualization goals. Caterina also shared Mapping_with_Palladio_Handout (1) outlining the steps of our workshop.

At one point during the workshop, we were discussing the different layers you can pick for the base map. You can upload your own custom layer as long as it is geocoded. She mentioned however that there are scholars who argue that it isn’t ethical to use historical maps in digital projects as this was never part of their intended use. She didn’t expand much beyond that, nor did she share her own opinion, more just that this is a concern that some people have raised. Has anyone else come across this? I’ve reached out to her for more information; I will let you know when I hear back from her.