Final Reflection - Ofness and Aboutness in Cataloging Photographs

“‘Ofness' is what an image objectively represents, its superficial perception, whereas ‘aboutness’ is what it subjectively represents.”1

The example below represents my understanding of ofness in describing a photograph. The provided title states this is a photo of two people on a porch in Alabama, but does not provide information beyond what the eye can see. The user can make guesses of the aboutness from the metadata provided. In my opinion, the most beneficial information from this photograph comes from the description provided below the photo. It goes into detail about the origins of the photo and explains that this a portrait of a father, a tenant farmer, and daughter during the Great Depression. The description goes on to explain that “strong and long-limbed like her father, Lucille Burroughs at age ten could pick 150 pounds of cotton a day. She also inherited a less useful legacy: her parents' lifelong debt to a landlord who owned their cabin, farm, tools, mules, and the product of all their labor”2 As helpful as the description is, its information will further affect the subjectivity of the aboutness. What I see in this photo is not necessarily what someone else will see in this photograph, and there in lies the problem of using aboutness in cataloging. 

Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/282778

       A common practice in subject indexing of an image is using a combination of aboutness and ofness to develop access points. To help understand how users might think about photographs, some institutions refer to Panofsky’s Theory of Iconology. Panofsky posited three levels of understanding: pre-iconography, iconography, and iconology. 

Pre-iconological description identifies the primary or natural subject matter, the   objects and events represented in the image. Iconographical analysis involves secondary or conventional meaning and requires a cultural familiarity that goes beyond everyday knowledge of objects and events. Iconological interpretation identifies the intrinsic meaning of content, requires a synthesis of pre-iconographical and iconographical information derived from the image itself, as well as knowledge about the artistic, social,and cultural setting to which it belongs.3   

The first step seems relatively easy to accomplish, as it is just identifying shapes and lines. The second level is a bit more difficult because there has to be a cultural understanding or the ability to be educated and develop a cultural familiarity. The third level is the most difficult. “Interpretation of the intrinsic meaning of an image is based mainly on the symbolic interpretation, and requires the knowledge and ability to make sense of what has been expressed behind those depicted.”4 This cannot be done without understanding the aboutness of the photograph. Sara Shatford provides a chart that attempts to separate the facets of classifying photographs into ofness and aboutness. I’ve provided the chart below:

Source: Shatford, Sara. Analysing the Subject of a Picture: A Theoretical Approach. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 6, 3 (Spring 1986): 39-62.

       After gaining an understanding of what ofness and aboutness are, the next step is to apply these elements to subject headings. This is much easier said than done and is left up to the discretion of the institution. Most institutions get their subject headings from thesauri like ERIC, AAT, and Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). LC catalogers also use "Thesaurus far Graphic Materials for prints and photographs; Moving Image Materials: Genre Terms for moving images; and both Genre of Terms: A Thesaurus and Printing and Publishing Evidence: Thesauri for Use in Rare Book and Special Collections Cataloguing for rare and special materials cataloging."5 These thesauri do not necessarily cater to the user, in fact they can often be a burden for a user to try and figure out.  The challenge then becomes developing subject headings for photographs that are able to describe the ofness, aboutness, and that your users would understand. 

_____________________

1     Note, M. (2011). Managing image collections a practical guide. Witney: Chandos Publishing (Oxford).

2     "Recent Acquisitions, A Selection: 1999–2000": The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, v. 58, no. 2 (Fall, 2000). Walker Evans.  

3     Note, M. (2011). Managing image collections a practical guide. Witney: Chandos Publishing (Oxford).

4     Fattahi, R., & Arastoopoor, S. (2012). Users' perception of Aboutness and Ofness in Images: An Approach towards Subject Indexing Based on Erwin Panofsky's Theory and Users' View. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/259364746_Users_perception_of_Aboutness_and_Ofness_in_Images_an_Approach_towards_Subject_Indexing_Based_on_Erwin_Panofskys_Theory_and_Users_View 
5     Harrison, H. (1996). Cataloging visual images: the view from LC. Art Documentation: Bulletin Of The Art Libraries Society Of North America, 15(2), 13-16.