Grants talk:Project/Rapid/dllu/Line Scan Camera

Hello, David Daniel! Thank you for your application for a Rapid Grant. This seems like an exciting opportunity to support your ability to add some high quality and useful images to Wikimedia Commons over the next 6 months. This specialized equipment is expensive, but you have made a good case that you have the expertise to use and care for it. We appreciate that you have identified a clear need for the types of photographs that could be produced through use of this camera.

Have you discussed your work with anyone else in Commons or in other Wikimedia communities? I think it would be good to have a few endorsements from other photographers or editors that also see the need for these images and have appreciation for your past contribution record. Does it seem possible to rally some support from your colleagues for this purpose? Thank you! Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 19:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Winifred! I'll contact some more of the Commons photographers that I've interacted with to garner support. By the way, it's Daniel, not David Dllu (talk) 01:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Daniel :) I'll continue to monitor the page over the next few days as the endorsements come in. Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 23:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment

Hi dllu,

Thank you for applying for this grant. I have no experience with this type of photography, and as such I feel I'm not well qualified to comment about the utility of this particular proposal. However, I feel that the camera should be owned by a Wikimedia affiliate organization. As far as I know, most camera equipment that is purchased with WMF funds become owned by, and loaned out by, affiliate organizations, rather than an individual person. The organization then loans the equipment to Wikimedians for their individual use in Wikimedia-related projects.

I believe that there is currently no active Wikimedia San Francisco organization, although there has been some activity in San Diego recently. Until such time as there is an affiliate in the area, I feel that it would be good to have this equipment be owned by one of the larger and more active US affiliates that has a national reach, which at the moment are Wikimedia New York City and Wikimedia District of Columbia. Both of those affiliates have active GLAM programs and I am thinking that they could find some uses for this equipment for their own activities, in addition to the activities that you propose. I think that both WMDC and WMNYC would be happy to talk with you about this proposal, and I imagine that agreements could be reached that one of them would become the owner of the equipment and loan it out to others such as yourself.

A tricky point might be how the costs of shipping and insurance would be covered between the affiliate and Wikimedians who live outside of the affiliate's immediate geographic area, such as yourself. I would suggest that this be included in the scope of discussions with the affiliate and WMF.

Thank you for taking this initiative. If WMDC or WMNYC feel that this equipment would be useful to them in their GLAM work, and can come to an agreement with you and WMF about the ownership, shipping costs, and insurance for the equipment, then I will have no objections to this proposal, and I will assume good faith that this is a good use of everyone's time and funds.

Regards, --Pine^✉ 20:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Pine's concerns

Pine, these are some helpful considerations.

1. We do plan to allow individual volunteers or informal groups to store and lend out equipment purchased through grants on occasion, especially if they live in an area that does not have an active affiliate group. I think this policy is necessary given the expanded opportunities for purchasing equipment with grants that we are now offering. Considering the 2,500 miles between San Francisco and New York, I would say that this situation qualifies. I know there has been some activity organizing in Los Angeles recently, and if this results in a formal user group, I think the user group can then take possession of the camera, in the event this request is funded.
2. As to shipping, I'd say the WMF would be happy to consider rapid grants to cover shipping costs of the equipment we fund if there are volunteers elsewhere in the country (or world) that need access to that equipment. So if someone in New York needs the camera shipped from San Francisco, they can submit a Rapid Grant request for WMF to cover the shipping costs of the equipment.

Best, Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 22:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wolliff (WMF), thanks for commenting.

• Perhaps a condition can be attached to this grant that the camera will become the property of a local affiliate if one develops.
• If WMF is comfortable with letting dllu be the owner of the camera until such time as there is a local affiliate, I would like to encourage dllu to collaborate in particular with WMNYC and WMDC regarding the use of this equipment, as I think that WMNYC and WMDC with their active GLAM programs may be in a good position to benefit from this equipment. They may also have people who are more qualified than I am to comment on the merits of spending $2000 on this equipment, so I would encourage them to weigh in on this proposal.

Thanks! --Pine^✉ 22:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks Winifred and Pine for your suggestions. I will be happy to give the camera to a local or nearby affiliate if one develops. I agree that collaborating with WMNYC or WMDC or any chapters with a strong GLAM program would be a good idea. A line scan camera is very useful for GLAM work as it can digitize the surfaces of cylindrical vases, pots, and urns using en:rollout photography, such as File:Maya vase.jpg. Line scan cameras have also been integrated into commercial products for book scanning, such as [1], though this requires constructing a rail to move the scanning camera. Dllu (talk) 00:53, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

• That sounds good to me, Dllu. I'm pinging Pharos from WMNYC and Kirill from WMDC to ask for their thoughts about this grant proposal, in particular how much they think that their organizations' GLAM programs would benefit if they had access to this camera. --Pine^✉ 04:36, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Wrt "loan" and "local affiliate" issues, I would in general encourage WMF to be more flexible wrt photographic equipment. It's said "the best camera is the one you have with you", and I'm concerned that if owned by a chapter then it will sit in a cupboard in some office rather than being used by an active photographer. There may be some groups where several photographers all share the same brand of camera and could share a specialised and expensive lens between them. But in my experience that is rare. For example, in London, the only other photographer I know who is significantly active at FP level is Diliff, and he recently moved back to Australia; and he shoot Canon whereas I am Sony. And that's a major world city. It is both expensive and risky to post DSLR lenses, as often they are excluded from insurance by couriers. Additionally, for significantly expensive equipment, there is the issue of insurance. If WMF require the recipient to replace the equipment if stolen/lost/damaged then he/she would need to add it to their home insurance as an high-value any-location named item. Doing this, if one only borrows a lens for a short period, would be expensive. While it may make sense for the local group to handle some administration/purchasing issues, it may be better if the equipment is given to a user for their protracted use. A condition would be that they remain actively using the equipment and if they become inactive for e.g. 3-6 months, then arrangements are made to give it to another user. For this project, perhaps some informal sharing could be done, if the project is successful. -- Colin (talk) 12:59, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Decision

Hi, Daniel. Thanks again for all your work on this request, and your many contributions to Commons. I think you made a strong case for purchasing the camera, but I'm not comfortable moving ahead with funding such an expensive piece of equipment without more community endorsement ($2K is at the upper limit of what we fund for requests like this). Rather than moving this request to "not funded", I'd like to move it back to draft status. That way you can resubmit it at some point if you can gather some more endorsements from your colleagues, because we'd be happy to reconsider it then. Best, Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 20:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, I might talk more with other Commons photographers or self-fund the camera in the distant future. Dllu (talk) 20:46, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Update

@Wolliff (WMF):, @Colin:, @Pine:, thanks for everyone's input! After saving money for half a year, I ended up being able to afford the line scan camera myself. As such, I'd like to withdraw this proposal. You can see an example of the output of the line scan camera above and the discussion on Featured Picture Candidates at Commons:commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Strip photo of San Francisco Cable Car 10.jpg and Commons:commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Set/Line_scan_photo_of_Shinkansen_N700A_Series_Set_G13_in_2017. I look forward to uploading many more photos in the future! Dllu (talk) 04:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Wow! Cool!! We'll update the category. Thanks for updating us and sharing your work, Dllu :) Best, Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 16:30, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

• Hi Dllu, thanks very much for the notification. I'm mostly inactive on Wikimedia now, though I might return in January 2018 or later. That is an impressive series of train images. If you happen to visit Seattle again I would be glad to meet with you for coffee. --Pine^✉ 20:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)