[bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols in 360 Degree Review

  • From: "Lori Castner" <loralee.castner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2011 14:30:48 -0800

It does, but it is certainly a strange concept.

Thanks.

Lori

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Judy s. 
  To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 11:51 AM
  Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols in 
360 Degree Review


  Hi Lori,

  I think I have a specific real live example for you. It isn't like sidebars.  
Sidebars, like you said, can just be repeats of what's already in the text.  
But what I called "parsley pictures" don't even do that.  I looked through an 
American literature textbook yesterday that's to have relevant images 
described. The page opposite the table of contents page and every page opposite 
the start of every chapter each had a full page image of a famous oil painting. 
 The paintings had absolutely no connection to the material being 
presented--none.  They were all lovely images, but they didn't relate one bit 
to anything the book contained, nor was any information or explanation about 
the paintings themselves given in the book. The images simply acted as a design 
element to the student to reinforce that they were at the start of a new 
chapter, and to give them something pretty that drew the eye.

  Does that help?

  Judy s.

  Lori Castner wrote: 
    Judy, thank you for this explanation, but could someone give me a real live 
example? I suppose that the comparison would be like "sidebars" that appear in 
books that use a phrase already given in the body of the text.  But what sort 
of image would be employed in a book?

    Lori

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Judy s. 
      To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
      Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2011 1:25 PM
      Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Full Inclusion: Image Description Protocols 
in 360 Degree Review


      I believe the image descriptions Scott is talking about are for NIMAC 
sourced textbooks. smile. So they're looking for descriptions for a totally 
different purpose, to make sure that information that's contained in the image 
and not in the text, is available to the student, and the description 
guidelines are related to that.

      A lot of the images that are in the textbooks are just there to make a 
page of text 'prettier' to a sighted viewer, and aren't even really related to 
the text. It's sort of like adding a parsley garnish to a plate of food.  The 
parsley isn't intended for eating and doesn't add anything to the flavor, size, 
texture or smell of the meal.  It's totally optional and just there to draw a 
sighted person's eye to the plate and give a visual cue that sighted diners may 
find pleasant. smile.

      Judy s.
      Susan Lumpkin wrote: 
        Hi Lori,


        I surely do hope you're incorrect because, if so, several of us, both 
sighted and blind, have spent a great deal of time either describing or editing 
descriptions of pictures in detail in such things as figures in a history book 
or landscapes in a nonfiction work or especially pictures in Children's books!


        Susan


Other related posts: