1 (edited by Josselin 2013-07-25 08:51:46)

Topic: Image properties

Hell Chris,

When I try to upload large images, the site sometimes refuses them and displays this:

Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 50331648 bytes exhausted (tried to allocate 16000 bytes) in /home/pallas/public_html/shared/php_func/old_functions.php on line 81

So is there a maximum size and/or resolution allowed? If yes, you should display these properties somewhere on the upload page.

This remark leads to a second point: when a large image is posted (more than 1280px wide), it is displayed with a 100% zoom and you need either to scroll right and down to see the rest of the picture or to right-click and "display image". Example with this image:
http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?ID=101724
Maybe you should integrate a zoom feature for these images. By default, the borders of the image would fit the screen; the zoom would display its "real size".

Josselin

Re: Image properties

Can someone explain to me how to enter artwork dimensions in inches? I sometimes find pictures with this kind of figures: 7 3/4 x 12 5/8.

Thanks
Josselin

Re: Image properties

Hello Josselin,
    A couple of quick replies:

On the artwork scaling question, I intend fairly soon to look at how the Web Gallery of Art does their viewer (with zoom levels, but auto-sizing to your window) and do something similar for us.

On entering artwork in inches, I think that's really a question about entering fractions as "fractions" rather than as decimals. So it might be convenient for instance to be able to type "12 5/8" instead of "12.625". In short, that's kind of low down my list of priorities, because:
1. I don't think people do it that often, or are terribly bothered about converting with a calculator.
2. You can do quick conversions with Google's built in calculator, by searching for "12 5/8 in decimal" for example. Try it! :-)
3. Fractional notation is different in different countries, and our audience is quite international. Not everyone uses the "numerator/denominator" convention. It's true that the same can be said with decimals and commas, but at least most people are pretty familiar with that notation even if it's not native to them.

So for now, I'd consider that a "luxury" feature when I'm looking for something to do. But feel free to convince me! :-)

Thanks,
Chris

Re: Image properties

Hello Chris,
Thanks for the artwork scaling explanation; I thought there was a way to directly enter those fractions in the textbox.
Josselin

Re: Image properties

Can someone advise how I enter accents in names and words (examples French/German accents, eg. musee).  Do I need to write in word doc and then paste it over?  It's a small thing but I note that accents appear on the website.

6 (edited by Josselin 2013-08-21 12:08:47)

Re: Image properties

I don't know if it is a good thing to put accents, because when you use the ctrl+f function, works with accents are ignored by the search. Therefore, I don't put accent for titles in French or German.
I think the good solution is to put the title in original language in the 'Alternate title' box. If you want to type accents or use foreign symbols, you can use this: http://www.leclavier.com/francais/ (just click on the buttons, then copy/paste your text).


As an aside, I just tell there that I usually try to translate in English most of the titles I find written in French, but some are too difficult, with obscure biblical characters whose names differ from English. I remove accents even for artworks I upload in original language.

Re: Image properties

chris_mccormick wrote:

Hello Josselin,
    A couple of quick replies:

On the artwork scaling question, I intend fairly soon to look at how the Web Gallery of Art does their viewer (with zoom levels, but auto-sizing to your window) and do something similar for us.
Chris

Chris

If you implement this will it be retrospective for art works already in the system?  I ask as I have been uploading Canalettos from the Royal Collection Trust website and they can only be copied and uploaded in full image ( where the zoom + appears)

Graham

Re: Image properties

Josselin wrote:

I don't know if it is a good thing to put accents, because when you use the ctrl+f function, works with accents are ignored by the search. Therefore, I don't put accent for titles in French or German.
I think the good solution is to put the title in original language in the 'Alternate title' box. If you want to type accents or use foreign symbols, you can use this: http://www.leclavier.com/francais/ (just click on the buttons, then copy/paste your text).


As an aside, I just tell there that I usually try to translate in English most of the titles I find written in French, but some are too difficult, with obscure biblical characters whose names differ from English. I remove accents even for artworks I upload in original language.

Thanks.  I note that accents appear in many titles (and names).  Many French works should be written in the correct manner to look professional.  But if its awkward and the system cannot research then I can leave it.  One can write the foreign language translation in the alternate box but it should still appear with the official accents.   It is debatable whether a French work is given its French title or the English translation.  But then, we are getting into deeper water with German/Spanish and Italian works perhaps?

If this website is to be fundamentally an English site then perhaps museums should have been given their English names, for example Uffizi Gallery instead of Galleria degli Uffizi.

Re: Image properties

My strong personal preference is to enter proper nouns in their "correct" form. Even English-speaking people would still write out a person's name or an artwork's name with the accents.

I did a test on my Mac. I went to the "art by artist page" (http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/counts … au&m=a) and did a CTRL-F search on "durer" without the accent:
- Google Chrome found "DÜRER, Albrecht" even though I didn't type the umlaut.
- Safari also worked.
- Firefox did not work

So on my Mac, two out of the three browsers work with CTRL-F searching. Our site search box (the one I coded) also works. Most of the ways to search therefore work fine, and I bet Firefox will eventually catch up on the CTRL-F thing. No idea about Internet Explorer, but that's close enough to not be a reason to omit accents.

If you find it a pain to enter the accents, don't let that stop you from adding new content, but I'd strongly suggest that we keep them in if possible.

On the museum name issue, give me a couple of weeks to work on it and let's see where we are.

10 (edited by Josselin 2013-08-22 03:43:09)

Re: Image properties

I didn't know that English-speakers preferred to have accents; I thought the contrary as accents can sometimes be displayed incorrectly. I will type them in the future.
I also use Firefox, I didn't know other browsers could ignore accents in search queries.

11 (edited by Josselin 2013-08-24 09:51:20)

Re: Image properties

Hi all,
I'd like to deal with another issue about image properties, which is image improvement. Indeed, I usually use several softwares to modify pictures in order to give them their original aspect, as they often look duller and darker than they were in the past.
A good example here:
The original nearly looks white and black: http://www.nationalgalleries.org/collec … rd_id/2582
The same after correction: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/detail.php?ID=107459
Is it ok for you, or do you think that we should display artworks in their current aspect?

The second issue is about frames. I read somewhere that there could be a copyright claim from the photograph if his photo has a frame depicted, since it is no longer considered as a two-dimensional work. Is the American law the same? because it sometimes takes me a lot of time to remove the frame.
Example of a work with its frame remove: http://www.the-athenaeum.org/art/full.php?ID=107278
Should I leave frames as they are sometimes part of artworks?

Josselin

Re: Image properties

These are my preferences, though in the end we can't really control it for everyone. There's always going to be a range of ways to enhance or color correct art, but I'd rather have the most "accurate" colors over the most "beautiful" colors. Individuals could then do whatever they want with our images to enhance or brighten colors, but we'd be a more authoritative source.

Having said that, it's near impossible to standardise that. There's a great article on the topic here: http://artwatchuk.wordpress.com/2011/01 … uary-2011/

Regarding frames, I think we're fairly "safe" so long as the image is straight on with no unusual lighting - nothing that looks like a "creative choice". I don't know when I'll get it done, but sometime in the next year I need to change our system to de-couple "artworks" from "images". Right now, "artwork" equals and image in the database. We need to have the ability for multiple images of artworks, so that detail images, front and back views, with and without frames, etc can all be images under one "artwork".

So for now, I wouldn't worry too much about replacing images that have frames. Just upload what you are comfortable with.

Re: Image properties

I agree that it is impossible to create a standard quality for pictures.
Anyway the problem will not exist anylonger when you create the multiple-images-per-artwork feature. We will be able to upload both museum quality photos (ie current aspect) and beautiful aspect pictures (original colours, without the dark varnish).