@conference {2505,
	title = {The FOSSIL Project: Engaging amateur fossil clubs and societies as downstream users of digitized data},
	booktitle = {2015 GSA Annual Meeting},
	year = {2015},
	month = {11/2015},
	address = {Baltimore, Maryland},
	abstract = {More than 60 amateur fossil clubs and societies are active throughout the U.S. today. In contrast to other science-interest groups like birdwatchers and stargazers, until recently fossil clubs and societies typically have been regionally focused with little communication on a national scale with other similar clubs and societies. Since 2013 the FOSSIL project has sought to unite amateur and professional paleontologists in the U.S. into a cyberenabled community of practice through meetings and related activities, newsletters, web communication and the rapidly expanding world of social media. Front-end evaluation of fossil clubs and societies indicates high interest in relevant science topics, the practice of collecting, and working with professionals. Thus, the development of fossil collections is a fundamental activity in common with these audiences. The FOSSIL project is working with fossil clubs and societies to educate about, as well as promote the benefits of, digitized images of fossil collections not just for research, but also for the education of downstream users. In addition, the use of 3D digitized images and replicas represents a newly expanding niche for K-12 outreach. Our overall goal for engaging members of fossil groups in digital paleontology is increased awareness and access to fossil resources and closer engagement of amateur and professional paleontologists in the U.S.},
	keywords = {Education and Outreach, FOSSIL, fossils, GSA2015},
	url = {https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2015AM/webprogram/Paper263439.html},
	author = {MacFadden, Bruce J.}
}
@conference {2501,
	title = {Maxing out the potential of private fossil collections through digitization: Best practices in photographing specimens},
	booktitle = {GSA Southeastern Section - 65th Annual Meeting},
	year = {2016},
	month = {03/2016},
	address = {Columbia, South Carolina},
	abstract = {Every private fossil collector is familiar with these questions: (1) How do I organize my findings? (2) How can I find specific fossils in my collection without turning my house upside down? (3) How can I exchange information about my fossil treasures with like-minded collectors in the easiest and most straightforward way? (4) How can I give my collection that unique touch? One solution to these problems might be creating a database with a digital image of every fossil as the central feature {\textendash} including all of the important additional data such as location and stratigraphic context. But one might ask: to get high-quality {\textquotedblleft}database ready{\textquotedblright} pictures, must a photo studio be rigged up in my house? To address this, the FOSSIL Project presents advice on best practices in photographing fossil specimens, from creating the ideal camera setup, to arranging specimens in the best manner, to use of proper lighting techniques. One goal of the FOSSIL Project is to increase the digitization skills of our paleontological community, and to provide this information in an impartial way. Depending upon the technology utilized, smart-phones can sometimes be entirely sufficient for photographing fossils; other times, more preparation and equipment is needed to reach the recommended photo quality. However, by employing a few tricks, photographing specimens can become much easier, which in turn will make personal fossil collections even more useful. The end game is to reach and fulfill the minimum quality requirements for a professionalized database, and the tips provided here will enable any collector to do so.

Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 48, No. 3},
	keywords = {FOSSIL, fossils, Photography},
	doi = {doi: 10.1130/abs/2016SE-273629},
	url = {https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2016SE/webprogram/Paper273629.html},
	author = {Leder, Ronny M.}
}
@article {762,
	title = {Poster: Fossils of Panama, A Guide to Common Fossils of the Gat{\'u}n Formation},
	year = {2013},
	keywords = {Education and Outreach, fossils, Panama, poster},
	url = {https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/poster-files/FoP_Poster_October.pdf},
	author = {Austin Hendy}
}
@article {789,
	title = {Poster: Fossils of Panama, A Guide to Common Fossils of the Gat{\'u}n Formation - Field Guide},
	year = {2013},
	keywords = {Education and Outreach, field guide, fossils, Panama, poster},
	url = {https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/poster-files/FoP_FieldGuide_October.pdf},
	author = {Austin Hendy}
}
@article {1324,
	title = {SPNHC 2014: Progress in Digitization: Designing a Workflow to Help with Error Detection in a Paleontology Digitization Project},
	year = {2014},
	abstract = {The Field Museum is implementing a three-year IMLS grant using summer interns to digitize approximately 15,000 Silurian fossil lots. Workflow for this project has each intern working on six drawers of fossils at a time; the fossils are all from the same geologic period and taxonomic group (as they are arranged in the collection). Interns cycle their fossils through three workstations: a label photography station, a fossil photography station, and a KE EMu data entry station. The average time per specimen to complete this cycle is 9.5 minutes with times ranging between 4 to 18 minutes. After cycling their cart through each workstation I edit, upload, and link the images to the catalogue records. In the first year 7,785 image were generated and linked to catalogue records. 
During the process of connecting images to the catalogue there are three opportunities to check for errors. First, KE EMu generates an error log of images that fail to link during the batch input.  The error rate is less than 2.2\%. Common errors include simple format errors in the batch upload, specimens not entered into the catalogue, and typos in the specimen{\textquoteright}s catalogue number.  Second, because specimens in each batch are from the same geologic period and taxonomic group it is easy to spot any inconsistencies or missing data when reviewing the records in a table format. Finally each record should have two images linked to it. Any missing images are easy to add.
},
	keywords = {digitization, error checking, Field Museum, fossils, interns, Silurian, SPNHC 2014, workflow},
	url = {https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/workshop-presentations/spnhc2014/07_1130_MayerPS.pdf},
	author = {Paul S. Mayer and L. Connolly and N. Karpus and A. P. Layng}
}
@article {1320,
	title = {SPNHC 2014: Progress in Digitization: Putting the contents of the Geological Museum on the web},
	year = {2014},
	abstract = {The Museum of Practical Geology (Jermyn Street, 1851-1935) displayed most of the British Geological Survey{\textquoteright}s specimen collection. With the move to the Geological Museum and then to Nottingham (Keyworth, 1985 onwards) most items were consigned to drawers. The internet has provided the means to re-exhibit these collections. BGS has been at the forefront of collections digitization since the 1970s. By 2000, the collections had digital catalogues of varying completeness, and in October 2000 the borehole and rock catalogues went on line. By 2006, all the main collections had online text and GIS searches.
During the past five years, BGS has made high resolution digital images of various collections available, including building stones and 4000 early twentieth century glass plates of the Kidston palaeobotanical collection. 125,000 7216 x 5412 pixel images of UK Continental Shelf cores1 were made available online in 2012, a project requiring a conveyor belt and extensive use of barcodes. 100,000 rock thin sections2 were added in 2013. The most innovative project to date has been a collaboration between BGS, the National Museum Cardiff, the Sedgwick Museum Cambridge, the Oxford Museum of Natural History and the Geological Curators{\textquoteright} Group (representing other national, university and local museums) to create an online database3 of British macrofossil types.  The web portal provides data about each specimen, searchable on taxonomic, stratigraphic and spatial criteria. High resolution photographs, stereo anaglyphs and many 3d digital models are available. We are keen to share our experiences, particularly of 3d digital models.

1 https://www.bgs.ac.uk/data/offshoreWells/wells.cfc?method=searchWells
2 http://www.largeimages.bgs.ac.uk/iip/britrocks.html?id=250000/258489
3 http://www.3d-fossils.ac.uk/ 
},
	keywords = {3D models, automation, British Geological Survey, conveyor belt, digitization, fossils, SPNHC 2014, SPNHC 2014: Progress in Digitization},
	url = {https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/workshop-presentations/spnhc2014/03_SPNHC_Digitization_Howe_P3_V2.pdf},
	author = {Mike Howe and Bob McIntosh and Simon Harris and Michela Contessi and Graham Tulloch}
}
@article {1323,
	title = {SPNHC 2014: Progress in Digitization: Workflows in the cooperative IMLS Silurian Digitization project},
	year = {2014},
	abstract = {Milwaukee Public Museum (MPM) is implementing a three-year IMLS grant in conjunction with The Field Museum to digitize our Midwest Silurian collections and create a shared online database.  The first workflow was between the institutions.  The joint nature of the project required information exchange between museums.  To coordinate a shared online database an effort was made to use shared vocabulary and Internal Record Numbers (IRN) for lithostratigraphy, chronostratigraphy and taxonomy data. Internal Records were generated at The Field Museum and shared with MPM.  After the first large data export smaller updates have been made.  MPM maintains a shared Google Drive spreadsheet with corrections and new data to be updated at The Field.  Sharing data creates an error check point.  
The second workflow for the digitization project is within MPM. The collection is organized stratigraphically.  The specimens all have a locality number but most do not have a unique specimen number.  Workflow starts with data entry into KE EMu using specimen labels.   Specimens without numbers are assigned the KE EMu Internal Record Number as specimen number.  The photography station is divided into two parts, fossil photography and photo processing. The fossils are processed by drawers and include a photo of the drawer and photos of each fossil in the drawer. A batch process is used to convert the raw image to .dng, .tif and .jpeg formats. The .jpeg images are then associated with the KE EMu catalogue data and the .dng and .tif images are saved in MPM{\textquoteright}s image repository.
},
	keywords = {digitization, Field Museum, fossils, Milwaukee Public Museum, Silurian, SPNHC 2014, SPNHC 2014: Progress in Digitization, taxonomy, workflow},
	url = {https://www.idigbio.org/sites/default/files/workshop-presentations/spnhc2014/06_Workflows\%20in\%20the\%20cooperative\%20IMLS\%20Silurian\%20Digitization\%20project_B.pdf},
	author = {Patricia Coorough Burke and A. Caywood and M. James and E. Malueg and D. Miller}
}
