by 
0
0
I’m curious to what extent object metadata can be pulled from TMS. I found these applications, though given that the Whitney already has an online collection, it may be redundant
http://binder.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user-manual/overview/intro.html
https://github.com/smoore4moma/tms-api
I’m interested in generating csv file(s) from TMS with provenance info for objects in the Founding Collection, similar to how Joshua created birth info and death info files for Founding Collection artists. I’ve started exploring what kind of reports TMS can generate, and how best to combine non-artist constituent data from these reports into a single database.
In TMS, I created four object packets sorted by credit line using Joshua’s object packet for the Founding Collection. I first searched TMS for objects with acquisition dates of 1948 or earlier to make sure Joshua’s Founding Collection packet is complete. I then broke down his packet by whether the object was a gift, purchase, or exchange, or if the record is missing credit.
I only found eight objects in the Founding Collection missing credit lines. These objects have provenance information recorded in the Constituent or Provenance field, but not the Credit Line field:
n.d. collection of the artist; -1931 collection of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney, New York, New York; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York (gift of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney)
| 31.229 | 1925- collection of the artist; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, New York |
| 31.321 | 1927- collection of the artist; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York |
| 31.324 | 1930- collection of the artist; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York |
| 31.335 | 1930 collection of the artist; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York |
| 31.370 | 1930- collection of the artist; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York |
| 31.378 | |
| 31.380 | -1929 collection of the artist; 1929-1931 collection of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney, New York, New York; 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York (gift of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney) |
| 31.964 | n.d. collection of the artist; 1930-1931 collection of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney, New York, New York (sold through Frank K. M. Rehn, Inc., New York, New York); 1931 Whitney Museum of American Art, New York (gift of Gertrude Vanderbilt Whitney) |
In looking at objects in the Founding Collection noted in the Credit Line field as being purchased, I’m noticing a significant number are noted in the Constituents field as being sourced/purchased directly from the artist. Since constituents in TMS may have multiple roles (both object-related and acquisition-related), separating galleries/dealers out from artists may be complicated. Checking acquisition-related constituents in the ‘purchase’ package against object-related constituents, possibly using a script or an application like OpenRefine, may be a way to find duplicate constituents. Joshua already created a cleaned-up artist data file, which could be used as a basis for separating out duel object and acquisition-related artists.
Somehow pulling names from TMS’ free-text fields like Provenance and Notes may be another way to find acquisition-related constituents. I know Prof. Matt Miller created an analyzer tool for the Linked Jazz project at Pratt meant to extract names from oral history transcripts (https://github.com/thisismattmiller/linked-jazz-prototype-transcript). I’m not sure how well it works or whether it’s ever been used outside the context of Linked Jazz, but it might be worth exploring. I could also manually look through the text fields for names. There are only 1,040 purchased works in the Founding Collection, so it might not be prohibitively time-consuming to do so.
I generated a ‘Text Entries’ report for the ‘purchased’ package I made in TMS to get a better overview of what kind of information is in TMS’ notes fields. I haven’t found that much new information on dealers, though I have found some interesting notes on other entities, like the name of people depicting in portraits, as well as names of friends, family members, and collaborators of various artists. I wonder whether collecting data on these people would be worthwhile, or whether it would be better to focus strictly on acquisitions. Additionally, I’ve seen some place names, such the location of scenes depicted in landscape paintings.
One issue I’ve noticed in the “Artist Biography-Online Publication” open text field is that these biographies occasionally refer to the wrong artist. I’m not sure if this is an issue with TMS, or an issue of information being generated from the wrong online sources?
I found a Wikipedia page for Frank Knox Morton Rehn, a painter and the president of the Salmagundi Club (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Knox_Morton_Rehn). Frank K. M. Rehn is noted as the acquisition source for 18 works in the Founding Collection, and VIAF notes F. K. M. Rehn as an alternate name for Frank Knox Morton Rehn (https://viaf.org/viaf/21155834/), but apparently Frank K. M. Rehn the gallerist was Knox Morton’s son (http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/frank-km-rehn-galleries-records-9193/more).
I’m wondering if the Subject Terms field in TMS might be an alternative to exploring provenance. It might be interesting to explore possible subject trends in art in the Founding Collection; there seems to be a trend toward figurative work, for instance.
