As a former Art History undergrad, I would sometimes turn to Google Images for my digital image needs (there were times that ArtStor just wouldn't have what I was looking for). While sometimes ArtStor can disappoint in terms of artists and works covered, it has a few things that Google Images doesn't: First, the quality of the images on ArtStor is very high-- the ability to zoom in on an image is invaluable, and a 500 pixel x 750 pixel image found on a Google search won't allow you to see every brushstroke in a Boldini painting. Second, ArtStor has a responsibility to maintain accessibility to scholars, whereas Google and much of the rest of the internet does not. Lastly, all of the images on ArtStor have reliable metadata regarding the creation of the artworks, where they are currently held, & etc.

Palmer School of LIS, Manhattan

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Michael Young <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Good afternoon,

Are any academic libraries finding that the web is more than adequate for their digital image needs, so that they are no longer able to justify the considerable expense of Art STOR, or have your users become dependent on ArtSTOR?

Michael Young

Art & Design Librarian and Arts & Humanities Team Leader

Homer Babbidge Library

University of Connecticut

Storrs, Connecticut 06269

Tel. 860-486-4953

Fax 860-486-6100

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.html Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc) to [log in to unmask] ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance: http://lsv.arlisna.org Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~