Skip to main content Accessibility help

The cataloguing and indexing of images: time for a new paradigm?

  • Margaret E. Graham (a1)

Funding opportunities and digitisation initiatives offer libraries, galleries and museums the potential to exploit their image collections – photographs, slides, drawings, pictures and works of art – in new and exciting ways. Many different organisations are involved in developing standards for the formal description of images (e.g. artist, title, photographer) and some effort is being made to develop compatible standards for the digital environment. Indexing of images can be a difficult task because images are rich in information and may be used by widely different groups of users, who may not always express their information needs adequately. Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) technology, which allows the retrieval of images based on similarity to a query image, has enormous potential, particularly if it can be combined with text-based indexing.

Corresponding author
Hide All
1. Graham, Margaret E. Description and indexing of images: report of a survey of ARLIS members, 1998/99. Newcastle upon Tyne: Institute for Image Data Research, 1999. (Also available at
2. Guides to quality in visual resource imaging. Council on Library and Information Resources, 2000. (
3. TASI framework. Technical Advisory Services for Images (TASI). (
4. Kenney, Anne R. and Rieger, Oya Y. Moving theory into practice: digital imaging for libraries and archives. Mountain View, CA: Research Libraries Group, 2000.
5. Milstead, Jessica and Feldman, Susan. ‘Metadata: cataloging by any other name . . .’ Online January 1999. (Available at
6. Dublin Core metadata element set, Version 1.1: Reference description. OCLC, 1999. (
7. Lassila, Ora and Swick, Ralph R., eds. Resource description framework (RDF) model and syntax specification. World Wide Web Consortium, 1999. (W3C Recommendation 22 February 1999). (
8. Day, Michael. ‘Metadata for images: emerging practice and standards’. Paper presented at CIR99 – Second conference on image retrieval, 25 & 26 February 1999, Newcastle upon Tyne. Newcastle: Institute for Image Data Research, 1999.
9. Lancaster, F.W. Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice. 2nd ed. London: Library Association, 1998.
10. Evans, Adrian. ‘TELCLASS: a structural approach to TV classification’. Audiovisual librarian vol. 13 no. 4 1987, p.215216.
11. Social History and Industrial Classification: a subject classification for museum cataloguing. 2nd edition. SHIC Working Party, 1993 (revised 1996). (See also
12. World Intellectual Property Organization. International classification of the figurative elements of marks (Vienna Classification). 4th Edition. Geneva: WIPO, 1998.
13. Opitz, H. et al. ‘Workpiece classification and its industrial application’. International journal of machine tool design research vol. 9 1969, p.3950.
14. Bjarnestam, Anna. ‘Description of an image retrieval system’. Paper presented at the Challenge of image retrieval research workshop, Newcastle upon Tyne, 5 February 1998. Newcastle: Institute for Image Data Research, 1998.
15. Graham, op. cit.
16. Rasmussen, Edie M.Indexing images’. Annual review of information science and technology vol. 32 1997, p.169196.
17. Cawkell, Anthony E. Indexing collections of electronic images: a review. British Library, 1993. (British Library Research Review, 15)
18. Besser, Howard. ‘Visual access to visual images: the UC Berkeley Image Database Project’. Library trends vol. 38 no. 4 1990, p.787798.
19. Shatford Layne, Sara. ‘Some issues in the indexing of images’, Journal of the American Society of Information Science vol. 45 no. 8 1994, p.583588.
20. Van der Starre, J. H. E.Ceci n’est pas une pipe: indexing of images’. In Multimedia computing and museums: selected papers from the 3rd international conference on hypermedia and interactivity in museums (ICHIM’95/MCN’95), San Diego, California, October 9-13, 1995. (David, Bearman, ed.) Pittsburgh, PA: Archives and Museum Informatics, 1995, p.267277.
21. Keister, Lucinda H.User types and queries: impact on image access systems’. In Challenges in indexing electronic text and images. (Raya, Fidel and others, eds.) Washington, DC: Learned Information for the American Society for Information Science, 1994, p.722.
22. Ogle, V.E. and Stonebraker, M.Chabot: retrieval from a relational database of images’. Computer vol. 28 no. 9 1995, p.4048.
23. Eakins, John P. and Graham, Margaret E. Content-based Image Retrieval: a report to the JISC Technology Applications Programme.’ JTAP, 1999. (Also available at
24. Idres, F. and Panchanathan, S.Review of image and video indexing techniques’, Journal of visual communication and image representation vol. 8 no. 2 1997, p.146166.
25. De Marsicoi, M. et al. ‘Indexing pictorial documents by their content: a survey of current techniques’. Image and vision computing vol. 15 1997, p.119141.
26. Flickner, M. et al. ‘Query by image and video content: the QBIC system’. IEEE computer vol. 28 no. 9 1995, p.2332.
27. Gupta, A. et al. ‘The Virage image search engine: an open framework for image management’. In Storage and retrieval for image and video databases IV Proc SPIE 2670 (Sethi, Ishwar K. and Jain, Ramesh C., eds). Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optical Engineering, 1996, p.7687.
28. Holt, Bonnie and Hartwick, Laura. ‘Retrieving art images by image content: the UC Davis QBIC project’. Aslib proceedings vol. 46 no. 10 1994, p.243248.
29. Smith, John R. and Chang, Shih-Fu.Visually searching the Web for content’. IEEE multimedia vol. 4 no. 3 1997, p.1220.
30. Chapman, Ann, Kingsley, Nicholas and Dempsey, Lorcan. Full disclosure: releasing the value of library and archive collections. Library and Information Commission, 1999. (LIC Report 10)
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Art Libraries Journal
  • ISSN: 0307-4722
  • EISSN: 2059-7525
  • URL: /core/journals/art-libraries-journal
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed