Searching Art by Subject at the TATE

Here’s the good news.

There are a lot of Search Terms…

The TATE has used a relatively expansive list of subjects to organize a prominent subject search capability for all the  works in its online collection.  According to the site there are 66,062 works of art by 3,075 artists in the collection, “every work in the Collection has its own online information page,” and “the majority are illustrated, though this is not always possible due to copyright restrictions.”

The Terms Organized Hierarchically…

The subject search option is prominently displayed on the home page of the collection along with the simple and advances search options.   In addition to a standard text search box, the subjects are presented an expandable list of 16 main categories, as shown on the left, for browsing.  There  are (by my count, which could be off) 155 second level subcategories.   Each of these subcategories is further divided into between 2 and 100 or more subcategories of its own.  There are too many for me to count all of them, and unfortunately the TATE does not choose to allow you to peruse them in alternate ways.   It is hard to estimate the total because the range is so great.  The main category Abstraction, for instance, has a total of only 10 ultimate sub-categories, whereas Architecture has 326 (ranging from Abbey to Zoo.)  Under the main category People, however, there are  1068 names in the single third level  subcategory of portraits:male. I can’t even make a guess as to the total number when these proper names are taken into account.  A conservatively estimate of general subject categories is 4,000 or so. It is evident that the Tate has created a pretty substantial subject matter breakdown.

You Can See the Term in the Context of the Hierarchy…

Although browsing within the hierarchy is limited, the simple search functionality is excellent and provides a different way to browse by subject matter.  The detailed categorization of the subject matter and the elegance of the interface options make the Tate approach shine.  A  search for “rose, my old standby search, brings up over 100 results including every appearance of “rose” in any level of the hierarchy displays, including those where “”rose” is part of a single word, as in “Rosenlaui Glacier,” and for each, a number in parentheses indicating how many works are so classified.   The display of this search, on the right, uses several basic, but effective tools to make it user friendly.  The font is large,the hierarchy is evident by both indentation and font color (the top level being shown in grey and the second level in black), and the search term, “rose,” is everywhere bolded.   It is easy for the user to find the context that that is of interest.

And Click Through….

A click on the search term in any of the contexts brings up a column of thumbnails for all of the works found with title and artist listed.   The number in parenthese clues you into the number os results to expect.  From the thumbnail list one can select a particular work and find further details about that work there.

To the Individual Work…

Each work page offers three tabs: Work, Images, and Subjects.   In the Subject tab for a particular work the full subject classification hierarchy is displayed and when one hovers over a subject term , the number of similarly classified works in the TATE collection will be shown.   By clicking on one or more of the subject terms and either searching for ANY or ALL of those terms one can meander endlessly through the collection via subject matter associations.

Such a new search will bring up the thumbnails for that subject term and so it goes.  The screen shot below illustrates how the appearance of the subject tab for The Tune of the Seven Towers by Dante Gabriel Rossetti.  The terms are again displayed in an easy to read format, and the use is very intuitive.  You don’t need to refer back to a guide to use Tate’s search function.   And you don’t have to go back to a search page for every search.

Or Hop on the Carousel…

I should have mentioned this feature first because it is very cool and was the first thing I actually tried out.  The Carousel is simply a page where    random thumbnail images from the entire collection appear and disappear one at a time.  It’s essentially a mini slide show.  By clicking on any thumbnail the full size version appears and the user has the option to save the image to a presonal colleciton of favorites.  It is a very fast, easy  and fun way to peruse the collection and explore works that catch your eye.   

What’s Not to Like?

The Browsing Function is Hampered by Limitations

There is no alphabetical browsing of the subject terms.  The only way to see all the categories is to drill down through three layers in 16 separate main categories silos.   In addition, the ability to expand a category is limited to one at a time, so one cannot even manage that sort of  limited  browsing easily.   I don’t think I’m the only one who sometimes wants to get an overview of the subject term contents, and for getting a quick sense of scope and detail there is nothing like dipping into the alphabetical listing.

The Search Feature is not Well Explained

There are many highly particular subjects buried in the Tate’s classification like the 1068 proper names of men mentioned earlier in portraits:male.  Among these are  Saints, mythological characters, and place names.   There are even dozens of books by title and author.   This information is valuable.  But I think the indiscriminate lumping of the particular together with the general with no way to sort these terms does a disservice to the user.   Given the richness of this content there ought to be a more direct route to the proper names of people and places, or an overview of search terms so that first time users have a sense, at least, of the  scope of the terminology that has been used.   This aspect of the search capability should be explained.

The terms used in the TATE’s taxonomy encompass ideas, emotions, and symbolism along with the unique identity of persons and places noted above.  It thus stretches far beyond “ofness” and well into the realm of “aboutness.”  Once again, this is not a bad thing.  But it is something that could be described to the user, and it is another broad disctintion that could be sorted.

Where did the Taxonomy Come From?

I’m also troubled by the failure of the Tate to provide any information about the source of the terms and the hierarchy used in the online subject search.  Does it, or any part of it, relate to an existing system of subject organization, such as The Thesaurus of Graphic Materials or ICONCLASS?   Beyond the inclusion of proper names, is the taxonomy  unique to the TATE?   Are the terms drawn from descriptions of the images contained in the Tate’s internal database of its collection?  Or were the works classified anew for the online collection?   If so, by whom?  These are a few of the things that would be worthwhile to share.   Ultimately it would be ideal for there to be a universally used taxonomy of subject matter.  While this may be further off than we would all like, one first small step in this direction is for collections to share with the public what system they are using.

The Images are Too Small.

While image size is not my primary topic, I must always draw attention to the display of the art works themselves.  They are after all the stars of any collection.  Unfortunately the Tate collection just doesn’t let me get very close to the work.  The largest images are simply to darn small.  The illustration to the left of  shows the full size image of The Tune of the Seven Towers by Dante Gabriel Rossetti.   It is 515 px by 449 px.   That is about 5.5 inches wide.   At this resolution you can only get the merest sense of the work itself, which is about 365 mm by 314 mm, or approximately 12.5 inches wide.

There is simply no reason for this chintziness.  At the very least one should expect a version that will fill the screen of a high quality desktop computer monitor.   It would be even better if allowed the mage to be seen in its full size.  Ideally one could zoom in to examine details not visible to the naked eye as can be seen in some instances online as discussed in my post on Ideal Access to Images.

Viewing details in this way is one of the two most important things that a digital collection can do better than a trip to the institution.   The other is to make available works that are not on view at the institution.   If there is a low resolution image online, there is a high resolution image in the institution as well.  This high resolution image is available to curators and art historians.  Why should it be denied to the public, at least when the works are held in trust for the public?  Why can’t we see them?  The answers have everything to do with money; both the preservation of future income from granting licenses to make copies and the additional costs associated with providing access to high resolution images online.  While I understand the reticence of institutions in the face of this new world and the uncertainties about how it will evolve I hope and believe that this reticence will eventually give way.

Back to top

Tagged as: Dante Gabriel Rossetti, ICONCLASS, Tate, Taxonomy, Thesaurus of Graphic Materials