When we began the project, we had no idea how many squeezes were in the collection, and we really did not know what condition they were in. One of the first steps has been to determine exactly what we have in the collection, and how many of the squeezes should be scanned. As we sorted through the collection, we realized that there are multiple copies of most of the squeezes.
We have come up with scanning criteria that greatly reduces the number of squeezes we will initially scan, which also hopefully reduces the cost. We have decided to scan only the clearest examples for each inscription, rather than the entire collection. This makes the most sense both financially and in terms of time – we can provide a digital library of the clearest squeezes in the collection, and will not be spending our time scanning multiple copies of the same inscription. In most cases, there are only minor differences in the copies. Where there is a great discrepancy, we are choosing the inscription that is the most intact. For the squeeze pictured below, we decided not to scan it because thought the letters are clear, the squeeze itself is very fragile and there was another copy of the same inscription that did not have holes in it.
The majority of our work on the project at the moment is both dull and repetitive; we spend one afternoon a week sorting through the squeezes to determine which ones are clear and intact enough to be scanned, and typing metadata into an Excel spreadsheet. In light of that, we have decided to use this space to highlight other interesting work in digital humanities, starting with a series of interviews with UBC students who created their own digital classics projects this past spring. The projects included websites, interactive mapping, text analysis and podcasts. We look forward to sharing their innovative work with you.