Categories
Art Art Computing Art History Art Open Data Free Software Howto Projects

Exploring Art History Data 1

Freebase have a section of visual art data: here.

You can download an archive of the data: here.

Expanding the archive gives you the data as tab-separated files:

$ ls visual_art
art_acquisition_method.tsv artwork.tsv
art_owner.tsv color.tsv
art_period_movement.tsv visual_art_form.tsv
art_series.tsv visual_art_genre.tsv
art_subject.tsv visual_artist.tsv
artwork_location_relationship.tsv visual_art_medium.tsv
artwork_owner_relationship.tsv

Loading up R, we can parse the files and check some of the features of the data:

$ R --quiet
> artwork<-read.delim("./visual_art/artwork.tsv")

> artwork<-read.delim("./visual_art/artwork.tsv") > names(artwork) [1] "name" "id" "artist" [4] "date_begun" "date_completed" "art_form" [7] "media" "period_or_movement" "art_genre" [10] "dimensions_meters" "art_subject" "edition_of" [13] "editions" "locations" "owners" [16] "belongs_to_series" > artists<-artwork$artist[artwork$artist != ""] > summary(artists)[1:20] Henri Matisse John Gutmann Pablo Picasso 72 66 66 Ferdinando Ongania Vincent van Gogh Caravaggio 57 57 49 Raphael Claude Monet Dr. William J. Pierce 48 44 42 Alexander Girard Tina Modotti Martin Kippenberger 37 37 36 Alvin Langdon Coburn Thomas Annan Robert Adams 31 31 30 Paul Cézanne Edward Weston Martin Venezky 29 28 28 Paul Klee Willi Kunz 28 28 > media<-artwork$media[artwork$media != ""] > summary(media)[1:20] Gelatin silver print Oil paint Canvas,Oil paint 1110 897 429 Oil paint,Canvas offset lithograph Albumen print 429 221 185 Bronze Photogravure chromogenic print 138 127 104 Acrylic paint Synthetic polymer paint Ink 82 69 67 Graphite Screen-printing Wood 61 57 55 Daguerreotype Mixed Media Oil paint,Panel 39 39 37 Panel,Oil paint Marble 35 30 > gelatin_silver_print_artworks<-artwork[artwork$media == "Gelatin silver print" & artwork$artist != "",] > summary(gelatin_silver_print_artworks$artist)[1:20] Dr. William J. Pierce John Gutmann 78 41 34 Robert Adams Ilse Bing Edward Weston 30 27 26 Walker Evans Tina Modotti Dorothea Lange 20 19 18 Lee Friedlander Lewis Hine Garry Winogrand 16 16 14 Henry Wessel Nicholas Nixon Ansel Adams 13 13 12 Harry Callahan Pirkle Jones Arnold Genthe 11 11 10 Bill Brandt Lewis Baltz 10 10

A couple of quick checks of the data show that it has some biases relative to mainstream art history, with more photography and photographers than you might expect. And there are several different entries for oil painting, which have skewed the numbers. This is interesting data, but about the dataset rather than about art more generally at the moment. Perhaps art history data will be as useful for institutional critique as for historical research.

Categories
Aesthetics Art Art Computing

More Streaming Aesthetics

I’m following up Streaming Aesthetics (Colour) with some exploratory programming in Python using tweetstream and the python curses terminal library. 

print_stream_terms keeps track of basic shape, colour and texture terms and reports on their relative proportions.

Here’s what it looks like when running:

Louisiana Weekly headline: "Conservatives blame the poor for being poor." In other news, sky blue again this week. #rubyconf

Terms: blue
pattern
stripe: 16/1333 dot: 33/1333 check: 1284/1333
colour
red: 506/866 yellow: 92/866 blue: 268/866
shape
circle: 59/164 triangle: 19/164 square: 86/164

art_is scans mentions of the word ‘art’ to find which of them are statements of what art is, and builds up a definition over time as words are repeated in definintions. It needs focussing on to the statements themselves, like We Feel Fine, as at the moment it considers the whole tweet.

Here’s what it looks like when running:

RT @drmardy: Art is a marriage of the conscious and the unconscious

{'beautiful': 1, '217': 1, 'art': 14, 'dont': 1, 'garbage': 1, 'p': 1, 'back': 1, 'general': 1, 'andre': 1, 'xx': 1, 'good': 1, 'tessa': 1, 'spanish': 1, 'star': 1, 'palette': 1, '7971': 1, 'enjoyed': 1, 'shurrup': 1, 'album': 1, 'gross': 1, 'mr_oddly': 1, 'pt': 2, 'callback': 1, 'sake': 2, 'newmetaldiscs': 3, 'ping': 1, 'american': 1, 'write': 1, 'state': 1, 'jessicaaaaaarrr': 1, 'obj5p': 1, 'tweets': 1, 'marriage': 2, '2010': 2, 'knowing': 1, 'rt': 1, 'dialogue': 1, 'murder': 2, 'http': 3, 'photog': 1, 'unconscious': 2, 'deleted': 1, 'quote': 1, 'story': 1, 'answers': 1, 'collab': 1, 'ridiculous': 1, 'link': 2, 'carl': 1, 'wedding': 1, 'alterado': 2, 'muted': 1, 'adversary': 2, 'fm': 1, 'startupstrategy': 1, 'minimalist': 1, 'kind': 1, 'arglbargl': 1, 'd': 1, 'thy': 2, 'artist': 1, 'i': 3, 'colour': 1, 'conscious': 2, 'hussie': 1, 'thing': 1, 's': 3, 'nicest': 1, 't': 1, '474': 1, 'rock': 1, 'faking': 1, 'aye': 1}

I think it will need to run for a while…

Categories
Aesthetics Free Culture

You Can’t Spell Fungible Without Fun

There are artworks that are very similar technically but utterly
distinct culturally and historically. Take the examples of a Kasimir
Malevich painting of a black square from revolutionary Russia and an Ad
Reinhardt painting of a black square from 1960s America. Technically
speaking you can’t get much more basic than a black square, but
culturally speaking there’s no way you can swap one of those black
squares for any other.
In contrast, software consists of easily substituted black boxes of
functionality whose formal qualities are insignificant (Vi and Emacs
aside 😉 ).
Stallman’s Four Freedoms are freedoms of *use*; the freedom to operate
software as a tool, as a means to an end. Stallman has written, briefly,
about how he views the freedom to use non-software works. That freedom
decreases the less the work is a means and the more it is an end, from
educational resources through to works of opinion and expression.
So fungibility for code and culture may simply be a product of the
degree to which something is a means rather than an end.
In contrast to Stallman’s freedom of use, the EFF use the concept of
freedom of speech to argue for people’s ability to work with software.
When we talk about free culture in general then if it has any meaning it
is primarily as a synonym for freedom of speech.
In order to speak freely, you must be free to refer to and quote the
words (or sounds or images or…) of others. And because of the
non-fungibility of cultural works, no other words (or sounds or images
or…) can be substituted.
A text editor works on a novel or a program listing equally well, and in
some jurisdictions software is regarded as a literary work for the
purpose of copyright. Different criteria of freedom may apply to the
fixed forms of software and art, but the restrictions are just the same.
For free software, part of the solution to this was alternative
copyright licensing.
So fungibility is related to use but free culture is concerned with
speech. It is not the case that free culture supposes or can in any way
cause cultural fungibility. And the non-fungibility of cultural works is
precisely why free culture requires the same solutions as free software
does at the level of copyright.