1 (edited by Josselin 2014-01-27 19:25:14)

Topic: Museum properties

Chris,

I think you should add a box for alternative names of museums - as you did for artworks - in order to enter both the original name and the translation in English. It would be especially useful for museums of Eastern Europe, where languages are very different from English. For example, the National Gallery of Hungary is named "Magyar Nemzeti Galéria" in Hungarian - not easy to guess at first sight!

Josselin

Re: Museum properties

Hello Josselin,
     Once I finish the task of artist qualifiers, I plan to take a look at museums. Here's a general overview.

I. Allow museums to be grouped.
We need a way to put many locations/museums into a larger group, such as the Berlin State Museums (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_State_Museums), or the UK National Trust. This means pages to create museum groups, pages to add museums into groups, adding museum groups to search, and thinking about how museum groups might be displayed in list pages.


II. Add more names for museums
At the least, I think we need to change museum/location names to allow "Name in the local language" and "Name in English". While we're at it, we should consider having some sorting names too, so that the Musée d'Orsay could be have the following:

Local name: Musée d'Orsay
Name in English: Museum of Orsay
Sorting name (English only?): Orsay, Museum of

Clearly there's a bit of work there. Also, we have again the question we'll have everywhere we create multiple names or aliases - do we enter the museum more than once in lists, under each name?

That's my current thinking, and hopefully I will get to it soon.

3 (edited by Josselin 2014-02-05 18:52:02)

Re: Museum properties

Maybe you should add textboxes for the "birth date" of a museum and its status (state-funded, city-funded, private-for-profit, not-for-profit, etc.).

4 (edited by Josselin 2014-06-22 19:50:35)

Re: Museum properties

I'm wondering what we should do with museums which doesn't exist anymore. As old records will still mention them, maybe we should keep a track of them in order to avoid any confusion for users or mistake by members.
It could be done with the "museum status" I mentioned above. One option would be "closed" or "destroyed" and we wouldn't be able to add pictures to this museum.
The Scheringa Museum voor Realisme is an example of a closed museum: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=1584

Re: Museum properties

Should I create museum entries for well established private collections such as the one in Burghley House, or the Barnes foundation?
http://www.burghley.co.uk/
http://www.barnesfoundation.org/collections/

After all, the British Royal collection or the Liechtenstein collection are private collections and have "museums" on the site...

Re: Museum properties

There appear to be a large number of small museums and [private/commercial] galleries being entered onto this website.  But I'm not sure if they should be here.  There are hundreds such galleries in London for example but they are commercial enterprises and basically advertise and sell works of art.

My entries are all recognized public museums and institutions.

Where do we draw the line?

Re: Museum properties

Well commercial galleries shouldn't be there as their artworks will move once sold.
On the other hand, Burghley House owns some artworks for centuries. The problem with these "museums" is that their catalogues aren't always up to date. So we never know if an artwork is still located there since they sometimes "discretely" sell some of their belongings through private transactions, whereas official museums are usually not allowed to do so. For example, even for a famous collection such as the Royal collection, there is always a doubt on the location of an artwork (is it in Buckingham or Hampdon Court?...)

Re: Museum properties

I have split the Musei di Strada Nuova of Genoa into the Palazzo Bianco and Palazzo Rosso. The Musei di Strada Nuova is just the governing body.
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2600

http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2819
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=885

9 (edited by Josselin 2014-09-10 03:57:00)

Re: Museum properties

The German museum system is really a nightmare.

Currently, we have two entries for museums in Augsburg:
Staatsgalerie Altdeutsche Meister Augsburg: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2713
Kunstsammlungen und Museen Augsburg: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2153

The latter is just the name of the governing body of the Augsburg museums, but the former is a collection within a building called the Schaezlerpalais, which also hosts the Graphische Sammlung der Stadt Augsburg, the Karl und Magdalene Haberstock-Stiftung, and the Deutsche Barockgalerie.
So should I create different entries for all these collections (listed here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der … Augsburg), or just one for the Schaezlerpalais? Considering that there are at least five other art museums in the city.

As far as I understand, this system is pretty much the same in the other lander, with usually an old masters gallery, a new masters gallery, a center of contemporary art, a graphic cabinet, and several museums of history and design. These are frequently hosted in the same building, but run as separate museums under the rule of a governing body.
So what should we do with German museums?

Re: Museum properties

Re the above:  It seems sensible to me to have separate museums and not to place all artworks under the one cumulative title.  Modern works (one of which is included in the above museum title) should be allocated to the neue gallerie and not to the alte meister museum.  Dresden and Munich are similar examples where artworks need to be split between old masters and 19th century onwards.

Re: Museum properties

Josselin wrote:

Well commercial galleries shouldn't be there as their artworks will move once sold.
On the other hand, Burghley House owns some artworks for centuries. The problem with these "museums" is that their catalogues aren't always up to date. So we never know if an artwork is still located there since they sometimes "discretely" sell some of their belongings through private transactions, whereas official museums are usually not allowed to do so. For example, even for a famous collection such as the Royal collection, there is always a doubt on the location of an artwork (is it in Buckingham or Hampdon Court?...)

In respect of the Royal Collection, it may have been best to have had one museum entry - 'Royal Collection Trust' but this would remain ambiguous (not that that matters as the majority of works are not on public display and are 'private').

I have tried to ascertain where each artwork is located but the Royal Collection website (which is excellent) doesn't usually state the whereabouts - that is probably due to the collection being moved from one property to another or to the Queen's Gallery, London, where public exhibitions are held.

A few works are permanently held in a particular property (Hampton Court Palace, St James's Palace and the Palace of  Holyroodhouse).  The major dilemma on location is between Buckingham Palace and Windsor.

Re: Museum properties

Josselin wrote:

Should I create museum entries for well established private collections such as the one in Burghley House, or the Barnes foundation?
http://www.burghley.co.uk/
http://www.barnesfoundation.org/collections/

After all, the British Royal collection or the Liechtenstein collection are private collections and have "museums" on the site...

Yes I think so.  Both examples are open to the public (the Barnes has a large collection of Impressionists).  There is an entry for Woburn Abbey which is in a similar category.

Re: Museum properties

kohn1fox wrote:

I have tried to ascertain where each artwork is located but the Royal Collection website (which is excellent) doesn't usually state the whereabouts - that is probably due to the collection being moved from one property to another or to the Queen's Gallery, London, where public exhibitions are held.

Yes, this is the main problem with the Royal collection. It sometimes happens with other institutions, such as with the two Titian recently bought by the National Galleries of London and Edinburgh as these works are routinely moved between both museums.
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-17220446

14 (edited by Josselin 2014-10-12 05:15:14)

Re: Museum properties

These are a commercial galleries, and must be deleted:
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=745
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=1571
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=1803
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=781
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2069
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=773
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=783
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/sources/detail.php?id=2780