In CALM archive cataloguing, we have been using the object term 'image file' for any image file formats.
This comes from common digital parlance rather than any specific thesaurus or guide, and makes it human friendly.
Using born digital object is too vague (it would be the equivalent of describing any print as a 2d object or a vase as a 3d object).
Digital image is fine but clashes with the current Wellcome Collection use of it for all images available through works (whether born digital or digitised).
Could image file be a local exception (particularly as we are using it already?)
In CALM archive cataloguing, we have been using the object term 'image file' for any image file formats.
This comes from common digital parlance rather than any specific thesaurus or guide, and makes it human friendly. Using born digital object is too vague (it would be the equivalent of describing any print as a 2d object or a vase as a 3d object). Digital image is fine but clashes with the current Wellcome Collection use of it for all images available through works (whether born digital or digitised).
Could image file be a local exception (particularly as we are using it already?)