Re: bugs with artists

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=4345

Replaced by Jean Daret.

Re: bugs with artists

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2181

Replaced by Nicolas Colombel.

Re: bugs with artists

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3001

Replaced by Cornelius Gerritsz. Decker

Re: bugs with artists

New list of empty artists:
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3030
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2965
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=4088
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2766
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2808
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2763
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2808
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3023
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2560
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2572
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2573
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2431
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=1447
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2905
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2484
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2732
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2544
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3574
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2397
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=1186
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2784
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3802
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2526

Re: bugs with artists

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=2965

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=4088

Replaced by Jan Baptist Huysmans (17th century)
Replaced by Jan Siberecht

Re: bugs with artists

George Alfred Stevens filled:

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3030

82 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-07 12:59:06)

Re: bugs with artists

Chris,

Do you know why so many artists has been created with no artwork? It is a source of confusion.

Josselin

Re: bugs with artists

Hello Josselin,
    Since we aren't displaying who added each person, it would take me a while to look them up in the database and find out. My guess is that some of them (at least) were entered by me, when I was testing different updates and bug fixes to the person entry pages. Usually I go find an artist on wga.hu whom we don't have, enter them, and then move on without adding any of their artworks. I don't think it's terrible to have placeholder artists without artworks added yet, but you and kohn1fox are being very clever about repurposing them.

- Chris

Re: bugs with artists

I have endeavoured to 'tidy-up' the artist entry works for Jacob Maris and Philips Wouwerman.  There were (and still are) numerous entered artworks belonging to 'unknown'.  Many of the unknowns have been allocated ownership.  Not sure why these were shown as of unknown whereabouts when it is quite easy to find out by some research (that I do all the time).  In the case of Wouwerman, some entries were only attributes.  Since there are many thousands of attributed works that have not hitherto been authenticated, it is perhaps best to remove them (which I did).

Also, under the same artist some paintings have been allocated to Staaliche Kassel, when in fact they belong in Berlin (Gemaldegalerie).  The Staaliche Berlin is a collective name for all the major museums in Berlin.  I am therfore reallocating any works I see from Staaliche to Gemaldegalerie Berlin, which is the actual repository for the works in question.

I have also added facts to the above artists (measurements, format etc) that were left out.

It is a pity that we cannot complete in as much detail as possible, info about artworks for the general public.  to see a painting whose whereabouts is unknown, with perhaps no dates or measurements, is somewhat useless to the viewer!

Re: bugs with artists

Chris

Josselin and I can continue to overwrite 'empty' artists when we have a new artist to add.  The original artist can always be reinstated if/when a work of theirs is to be entered.

Re: bugs with artists

kohn1fox wrote:

I have endeavoured to 'tidy-up' the artist entry works for Jacob Maris and Philips Wouwerman.  There were (and still are) numerous entered artworks belonging to 'unknown'.  Many of the unknowns have been allocated ownership.  Not sure why these were shown as of unknown whereabouts when it is quite easy to find out by some research (that I do all the time).  In the case of Wouwerman, some entries were only attributes.  Since there are many thousands of attributed works that have not hitherto been authenticated, it is perhaps best to remove them (which I did).

Hi Graham,

I usually add "attributed" works as well as "secured" ones, with the mention in the textbox that "attribution is disputed". See here for example: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?id=121244

I already discussed of attribution issue here: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/forum/view … 1094#p1094
I propose to put an additional feature in the artwork edit page, on which we would be able to choose the level of attribution of the artwork. By default, it would be "secured", but we could choose "attributed", then "workshop of" and "school/follower of".

Josselin

Re: bugs with artists

Attributions are a complex area.  There are so mnay attributions to artists (especially the early ones).  I am not sure whether we should include them, even with a note about the reliability of the attribution.  Two/three that I found for Philips Wouwerman, I placed into the Dutch 17th Century Unknown, with a note that they are attributed to the master.

However, a' 'attributed to....' entry is more than 50% certain it is by the said artist and some scholars will place the work as that of the artist, whereas other authorities mught dispute the attribution.

I think that workshop and follower should NOT be included, since these descriptions are NOT by the artist in question.  There are also thousands of such works and where do we draw the line?  However, some may be collaborations with the master and his workshop.  Provided that a large part of the piece is by the master (more than 50% for example) then it could be included under that artist's oeuvre, but with a note.  I have included a number of artworks that were collaborations between two masters (the Le Nain brothers for example) and I have made a note to that effect.

How do people feel about attributions?

Re: bugs with artists

Filled by Simon de Vlieger

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=3023

89 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-09 10:20:54)

Re: bugs with artists

Hi Graham,

The idea would be to display "attributed", "followers of", etc. separately from "secured" artworks in the list of artworks.  Authors of catalogues raisonnés usually add several appendixes in which they put attributed works, by followers, etc. and works erroneously attributed to the artist.
Maybe Chris could create a second list on the artist page which would display "artworks made by unknown artists related to [name of the artist]".

I think we should follow this system for two reasons:
- It will prevent future uploaders from posting artworks which are not from the artist's hand. I have found many image databanks which propose all the artworks related with one artist regardless of the categories of attribution listed above. If you put the related artworks elsewhere than on the artist page, one could think they haven't been posted yet on the site, subsequently causing duplications and mistakes.
- It will be too difficult to search for duplicates in the "unknown" pages when they display more than several hundreds of artworks. These special artists pages should be dedicated only to artists designated as "unknown" by museums. We need to limit as much as possible the number of artworks in these special pages or it will be tough to find an artwork there!

What do you think?

Josselin.

Re: bugs with artists

Josselin,

Are you saying that we should have a separate 'artist' for attributions and followers?  I think this is a good idea for attributions, since there is a strong possibility that the work is genuine, but NOT for followers.  Examples might be, "Philips Wouwerman - Attributions" or "Rembrandt van Rijn - Attributions" ?

Although I placed a couple of attributed works for Wouwerman to 'unknown', these can always be redirected to a suitable list.  But in British collections there is a great number that are only attributions and to include these in the artist's known works can distort the quality of known works (especially if they prove eventually not to be by the artist).

I am not so happy with followers or workshops.  These are clearly not by the artist but someone else and they should not be included on this website.  There are just too many around.  I am not convinced that all the works listed under, for example, Corot, are genuine as his works are notorious for having been copied (and many are probably in museums now).  But that is another matter.

I would be happy for an 'Attributions' list to exist.  Maybe under the name of an individual artist rather than a generic list for all and anyone?  But I think we should rule out followers, workshops etc as this is inviting too many second-rate works.

But Chris should have the final word on this.  Good luck

Graham

91 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-09 12:06:25)

Re: bugs with artists

kohn1fox wrote:

Are you saying that we should have a separate 'artist' for attributions and followers?  I think this is a good idea for attributions, since there is a strong possibility that the work is genuine, but NOT for followers.  Examples might be, "Philips Wouwerman - Attributions" or "Rembrandt van Rijn - Attributions" ?

I don't want to create a new artist for his attributed works, but a new artwork list on the page of the artist. You would therefore have two (or more) lists there: one for "secure" works, another for "attributed", and maybe others for "followers" and "workshop", etc.
We would get closer to an online catalogue raisonné by doing this way.

Rembrandt's page would display this:
"List secured artworks (573)"
"List attributed artworks (XX)"
"List artworks made in his workshop by unknown pupils (XX)"
"List artworks made by unknown followers (XX)"

Is it clearer this way?

Josselin

92 (edited by kohn1fox 2014-01-09 12:58:56)

Re: bugs with artists

Yes that makes sense.  But it involves a great deal of extra work, unless one tends to follow this ruling as and when we come across works.  Rembrand is a good example, since a lot of those works can be either attributed to the master or his workshop.  But aren't we opening up a whole plethora of indifferent artworks to include unknown followers?

Anyways, I am content with whatever is decided.  Workshop/followers etc are only relevant with earlier artists, i.e. before 19th century.

I am trying to visualise the practicalities.  So we go to the index for Rembrandt, then it would list in the same general index:  the listing you suggest above?

Re: bugs with artists

Hello Graham and Josselin,
     First off, let me say that I love that both of your are thinking it through at this level, and that you share my ambition to work toward making this site the best possible resource for scholars. Here is what I propose:

Attributions which are in dispute: Neither I nor my wife (an art historian) have seen the term "secured" for attributions that are not in dispute. I propose for now that we put all artworks with some support for attribution to a particular artist under that artist. To use Graham's percentage example, let's say that 30% of modern art historians believe an artwork is the work of Rembrandt, but 70% do not. I think it should still go under Rembrandt, for two reasons:

1. Uniformed viewers (or those guided by poor sources) will come looking for it, and should find it in the expected place.
2. There is a fact of history that some scholars have believed or do believe in the attribution.

However, I propose adding a flag where we can note that attribution is "disputed". This would then display in a prominent way on the page. So artworks for a given artists would either have the "Disputed attribution" flag or not.

One day when we have many more scholars on the site, I'll add to this, so that flagging an artwork as "disputed" will create a new tab on the artwork page. This tab will have a discussion thread, so that people can discuss the attribution, without it getting in the way of the main article about the artwork. I think we have a lot of more pressing needs right now, so for now, it would just be the "disputed attribution" flag.


"Follower of" and "Workshop of": I see these as different from a disputed attribution. A disputed attribution is still attached (strongly or weakly) to authorship by a specific artist, but "follower of" and "workshop of" means generally "we don't have a name for this person". I propose that those are represented on the site much like normal artists, showing up in the artist lists, etc. The way we would get those entered would be a new section on the artwork entry page. Instead of entering a name, one could use a prefix (hard-coded in, so it's consistent) attached to an artist. So there would be an artist dropdown list, and also a list with "Follower of" and "Workshop of," which would combine with that artist name to create a new "person" record.

If we think about this, doing a search for an artist's name would also show the "Follower of ..." and "Workshop of ..." versions, but they would be separate lists from the main artist, since they are pretty well designated as not the artist. On the artist page, if such related "people" are found, there would be a link to them.

Does this sound ok?

It will be a bit of work to get it all put together. I could do the "disputed attribution" flag pretty easily, though.

-- Chris

94 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-09 14:36:34)

Re: bugs with artists

Hello Chris,

I totally agree with thee " flag system" for attributed works, but not entirely with the rest.

Here is a painting made by an unknown artist after an original by Girodet: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?ID=121299
The portrait of Chateaubriand is one of the most famous portraits in France and it is clearly worth an entry here.
But as we don't have any picture of the original work, I found it better to link it with Girodet, because most people think it is the original work and will look for it on Girodet's page.
This is principally for this reason that I think works done by unknown artists after a better known one should be displayed on the page of the later - in a separate list or section.
I'm also reluctant to create new entries for unknown artists as it would confuse the database and occasional visitors. The artist list is already very long, with more than 6.000 names...

Josselin.

Re: bugs with artists

Hi Chris and Josselin,

In most cases of 'attribution' we do not know to what degree of authenticity an attributed work displays.   By its very nature attribution is disputed, otherwise it would not apply and the work would be wholly by the artist. Such a description against a work usually simply states 'attributed'.

The flag idea sounds good.

I am still a bit concerned about the numbers of extra works under the 'follower', 'after', 'workshop', 'assistants' etc that we are dealing with.  The numbers run into probably thousands, when taking into account all major old masters.   But I suppose that is not an obstacle necessarily.  If we are to go down this route then I prefer that any > associated > linked works for that artist are shown under the page for the artist (as you suggest a dropdown window that opens a choice of entries)  For example, with a REMBRANDT 'workshop' piece,

(i)  Workshop/Studio
(ii)  Follower
(iii) After

I hope I have understood your explanation, Chris, correctly!

I don't think there will be many occasions when an artwork is well-known but the artist is unknown, as Josselin has presented (Girodet/Chateaubriand).

Graham

Re: bugs with artists

Hello, everyone.
This artwork http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?ID=129360 is definitely not by Gustav Klimt but by some little known artist Erich Klimt.
I wonder if it's possible to remove it from Klimt's page in order not to confuse other users?

Re: bugs with artists

Hi Irene.  Perhaps Rocsdad could mention how it was shown as a Gustave Klimt, unless it was a simple error in the name.

98 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-12 20:36:45)

Re: bugs with artists

Chris,

Could you put somewhere a list of all the empty artists and museums? I can retrieve them with the searching feature but it would be easier to have the whole list displayed.
Otherwise, maybe you can delete all of them as it confuses a lot the dropdown list when entering a new artwork, especially with museums. Many of former museum duplicates have since been "cleaned" but continue to appear in the dropdown list.

However, if you choose this option, I warn you that I created an influencial artist who hasn't any artwork connected with him: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/people/detail.php?ID=6164
Currently, "empty" artists do not appear in the artist list, maybe you can make an exception for him.

Josselin.

Re: bugs with artists

Hello Josselin,
     I just deleted 238 person records, where ALL of the following were true:

1. They were flagged as artists.
2. They had no artworks in the database.
3. Their ID was < 6000.
4. They had no description.

There are about 40 person records who are listed as artists but have no art, which I have left in - either because they are new records, or because they had some descriptive text.

When we find "empty artists," I think the first goal should be to find and upload one or two of their artworks, rather than to overwrite them with someone else.

There will be cases where we have someone who we want to track as an artist, even if we don't have any artworks for them yet. One example would be if a contributor begins to create records for all members of the Royal Academy for a certain year. Someone working on The Athenaeum may create all of the "stub" records for people first, then try to find art for them.

Re: bugs with artists

Josselin, Graham, and others:

Please comment on the thread linked below to share your thoughts on the design for having multiple artists per artwork. I want to separate that discussion from this thread, and I'd like your thoughts before I begin building it.

Thread is here.

Thanks.