Talk:List of works by Thomas Eakins

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Untitled][edit]

Perhaps sculptures, drawings, and paintings could be split up into separate sections ala List of works by Caspar David Friedrich? Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 06:49, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried something different and somewhat more complex with the TOC. What is the issue with the final work? Is it not mentioned in Goodrich? Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not. The Goodrich catalog (circa 1930) is good, but he was bound to miss a few. I'm cross-checking against the Hendricks catalog (circa 1970). I also have a few other books to check against. Raul654 (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind - despite my best efforts, I didn't realize the Coral Necklace was the same as Miss Fenton until Modernist tweaked it. Raul654 (talk) 00:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to start here, and got caught up short on my first one: according to Goodrich's 1982 monograph, 'Standing Nude Woman' is #2 (currently listed as #17), and is dated 1863-1866. What to do? JNW (talk) 03:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused -- so did Goodrich's catalog list the same work twice (as #2 and again as #17) or have I simply categorized #2 as #17? Raul654 (talk) 04:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that #17 ought to be #2, at least based on the '82 publication. However, I don't know where that leaves the work currently listed as #2. I am finding other discrepancies in numbering and dates of works as I go along. Assuming Goodrich's '82 listings are updated revisions from his earlier catalog and Hendricks's book, shall I make changes where I find contrasting information? JNW (talk) 13:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I stopped by the library and got another 8 or 10 books about Eakins. Several of them have concurred with the above that the picture listed here as 17 is actually #2. I've moved it accordingly. Raul654 (talk) 22:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The painting shown for William Rush and his Model on 453 is probably 452?. And this one fits in somewhere in the 445-447 range [6] Yomanganitalk 10:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found that painting in "Thomas Eakins" by Sewell (2002), page 106, figure 6. It gives it a number -- "pl. 238". Unfortunately, I don't know what this is a reference to. Raul654 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ARGH. "pl. 238" = Plate 238. I'm going to go put on a dunce cap now. Raul654 (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now on wikipedia here. See also this. Raul654 (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Terrific job so far everybody, Raul - especially...Modernist (talk) 00:41, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]

Just a few notes:

Second, I notice on the Hirshhorn website, if you search for "Eakins", you get an incomplete listing (it didn't pick up this, for example). Raul654 (talk) 04:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was working on List of works by Caspar David Friedrich another user pointed me to a program that can automatically break down zoomified images and composit them into one large file. [7] I haven't been able to get it to work, but perhaps someone with more advanced computer skills might be able to. You may try dropping User:Olpl a line, if he's still around. Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 13:57, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The file you linked to is a library (an incomplete program). I think the main program is here:
http://www.staremapy.cz/zoomify-analyza/zoomify_downloader.py Raul654 (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SUCCESS! I got it working on Christie's website. I haven't had any luck on the Sothebys website (yet). Raul654 (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also works here, but not on the Southeby's or Philadelphia Art Musuem websites. Raul654 (talk) 19:59, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm beyond my depth here, but it may be the difference between this and [8]? I have no clue really. Either that or the PMA uses a newer or different version of zoomify than this program was built for.... Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 20:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It might be simpler than that -- PMA and Southebys may not be using Zoomify at all -- their sites have a totally different user interface. Raul654 (talk) 21:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I might be technically biased here, but it seems much simpler to me to just intercept all HTTP requests using a local HTTP proxy and then check the log to see the full-size images requested. No mucking about with pasting stuff together; just get the original file as a whole.
E.g., 44147.html?mulR=31083 requested http://www.philamuseum.org/images/cad/zoomers//1930-32-7b.jpg
As for the Sotheby's site, it does indeed use a different viewer and requests the images as tiles. However, we can play with the URL it requests a bit:
E.g., lot_id=159451555 requests http://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/Sothebys/N08449%2D53%2Dlr%2D1?layer=comp&bgc=0xffffff&op_sharpen=1&req=tile&id=23FecvkDaL_H65ApVLDrS_&rect=256,1024,256,256&scl=1&fmt=swf when fully zoomed. When you change the fmt parameter to produce JPEGs, and adjust the coordinates in the rect, you can get the full-size image. This is my first attempt. Notice the extra whitespace because of the overly large rect (which is easily trimmed out of course): http://s7d2.scene7.com/is/image/Sothebys/N08449-53-lr-1?layer=comp&bgc=0xffffff&op_sharpen=1&req=tile&id=23FecvkDaL_H65ApVLDrS_&rect=0,0,2560,2560&scl=1&fmt=jpg
--94.225.45.239 (talk) 08:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wow - that's great work. Can you recommend http proxy software? (for windows, linux, and mac) Raul654 (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind - apparently firefox can log its own http traffic. Raul654 (talk) 08:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I completely forgot about that. :-) Just to clarify: famsf.org still requires the zoomify downloader, as it really does split the entire image into tiles on its server. (You can easily tell by looking at the requested URLs: TileGroupN/a-b-c.jpg. --94.225.45.239 (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'm an idiot. The easiest thing to use is Firebug. I had incorrectly assumed that it would not log HTTP requests coming from Flash, but it does. Yay! Get Firebug, open it by clicking the little icon in the bottom right corner of the brower, and watch the HTTP requests in the "Net" panel. It even shows you a thumbnail when you hover over the image requests. --94.225.45.239 (talk) 09:53, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is great; we now have lots of options for dealing with zoomify... thank you. Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 15:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions on using the program[edit]

Here is how to use the python script to extract images. You need a unix-like operating system with python installed. (This works on Linux, and maybe on Mac OSX):

wget http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mpellegr/zoomify/zoomify.py
wget http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mpellegr/zoomify/zoomify_downloader.py
mkdir temp
python zoomify_downloader.py XXX temp

where XXX is the URL of the Zoomify page from which you want to download an image. (For example, XXX=http://www.famsf.org/imagebase_zoom.asp?rec=7822312331540003 )

The final output file will be stored in the temp directly. The program won't output files more than 8192x8192 pixels. Raul654 (talk) 21:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For those of us who are running windows at this time, do you think that Damn Small Linux running on the QEMU emulator would do the trick? Once again I'd try it myself if I had time... Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 13:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest giving Cygwin a try first. Raul654 (talk) 14:25, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updated catalogue raisonné doesn't exist[edit]

Important reading here. The Philly Art musuem, to whom Goodrich donated his Eakins documents, says the 1933 catalog omitted 85 works. Worse, it says that Goodrich worked on a revised catalogue raisonné "almost until the day he died" and apparently nobody has yet published a revised one. I'm considering emailing Dr. Homer again just to confirm this. If true, what do we do with the many works that don't belong on this page, for which there isn't a published catalog? Raul654 (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that that page also explains how the updated works were to be categorized, and what the J prefix means (Juvenilia, for Eakins early works not in the original catalog). (At the very least, I'd like to get my hands on the Juvenilia catalog). Raul654 (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hendricks[edit]

I've added Hendrick's 1972 photographic catalog to this page. Other than the missing 85 works (see above) from the Goodrich catalog, I think this page is complete. Raul654 (talk) 06:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Black and white images[edit]

I notice that many of the black and white images aren't thumbnailing very well (The study for "Margaret" and "Scene in a Cathedral", for example). This seems to happen when printed reproductions of b/w drawings are scanned: the thumbnail exaggerates the dot matrix pattern at the expense of the image. You might try creating lower resolution versions for the purpose of thumbnailing, and then linking from them to the full resolution version. I'd do it myself if I had time. Petropoxy (Lithoderm Proxy) (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing the resolution is one solution, but by reducing the resolution you are throwing out usable data along with the bad (the white space).
Ideally, there should be some kind of image filter to "de-matrix" a scanned printed image. Way back in my heady undergraduate days, I did a bit of signal processing programming in matlab, and what I was doing wasn't too far removed from that. So it should be relatively simple for an expert to do it, and I'd be surprised if one hasn't done it already. Raul654 (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Missing works[edit]

I called the Philadelphia Museum of Art today and spoke with one of the American art curators about the Goodrich papers. I wanted to know where I could find (1) a list of the works in the juvenalia catalog and (2) the list of 85 missing works from the '33 catalog. The answer I got was, as far as they know, those listings have not been published in their entirety anywhere. So the only way to get the information is to go in and get it directly from the Goodrich papers. I think I'm going to do this in mid-to-late September. Raul654 (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mental note -- Kathleen Foster's contact information is available here. Raul654 (talk) 20:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mother[edit]

I don't know if it's already listed ( too difficult to look through list on mobile device) but there is a Thomas Eakins painting called Mother (Annie Williams Gandy) at the Smithsonian American Art Museum in the Luce Foundation Center 166.199.50.196 (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are talking about #391. Raul654 (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Studies of a Baby[edit]

Just a note - after a good deal of detective work, I tracked down #100 (Studies of a Baby) to Duke University. Apparently it's owned by the Semans-Duke Foundation, and stored in the Nasher Art Museum. Nasher takes care of it, but don't own it and don't normally have it on display. However, they recently loaned it out to Asheville Musuem of Art, where presumably it will go on display soon (if it's not already). I called the musuem to ask, but they haven't yet returned my call.

While it is on display, I think it would be extremely helpful if someone in the area could drive over and snap pictures of it. (It's a double-sided work, so both sides, if possible; this may require permission from the museum). Raul654 (talk) 06:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article scope and structure[edit]

At the suggestion of William Innes Homer, I've removed the section on Eakins photographs. Both he and I agreed that the section was a a mess (In particular, when creating that section I unwittingly changed all of Hendricks's "Circle of Eakins" attributions to Eakins, which is factually wrong; and the Hendricks book itself is both outdated and unreliable). So for the moment, I plan to limit the scope of this page to paintings, drawings, and sculptures.

However, the sculptures are also a mess. Not as bad as the photographs, but *extremely* incomplete with several incorrectly listed photographs. The more I work on this article, the more I realize how incomplete Goodrich's survey of Eakins sculptures was. (Based on the number of non-Goodrich listed sculptures I've seen, I'd guess he cataloged maybe a third of them) Dr. Homer also suggested I drop the sculptures, but I'm not yet willing to take that step.

I do plan to add two more large sections to this article - one for the Bregler catalog and one for miscellaneous works that do not appear in the Goodrich or Foster/Bregler catalogs. I'm on the fence for what to do about works whose attribution to Eakins is disputed. This includes the portrait of Barnitz, the Workman, and the Study of the Old Man, just to name three. Raul654 (talk) 07:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Story about the Conservation of The Gross Clinic[edit]

Check out the PMA's new webiste about the conservation of the Gross Clinic. Also check out art critic Lee Rosenbaum's discussion of the conservation work on Huffington Post, in which she says the painting is now "startlingly" different. I considered making mention of this in the "Notes" field, but was intimidated by the table formatting issues. It's be cool if more WP articles made mention of conservation issues...--Richard McCoy (talk) 13:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section to the Gross Clinic article about the (multiple) restorations the Gross Clinic has undergone. I don't think it's really feasable to keep that information in this article (except where paintings have been cut down and thus have different dimensions listed in different sources). Raul654 (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PMA pics[edit]

Our friends at the PMA have been busy adding images of Eakins works to their website. A number of works that weren't there when I checked last year (circa August) are there now. Here is what needs to be replaceed:

I'll get started on this soon. Raul654 (talk) 08:45, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that I want to replace File:Study for Monsignor James F. Loughlin.jpg with [16] Raul654 (talk) 09:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RIP Bill Homer[edit]

Over Christmas vacation, I found out that Bill Homer, who was extremely generous with his time and resources in helping me to create this article, died a few months ago. I'll be sending a condolence note to his wife Christine, and I'd be happy to include any similar sentiments from this article's other editors. Raul654 (talk) 20:19, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to read this, he was an interesting art historian...Modernist (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carney, Raymond Francis, Junior, “When Mind Is a Verb: Thomas Eakins and the Work of Doing,” In: Dickstein, Morris, (Editor), “The Revival of Pragmatism: New Essays on Social Thought, Law, and Culture,” (Post-Contemporary Interventions, Series Editors: Fish, Stanley Eugene and Jameson, Fredric Ruff, Durham, North Carolina and London: Duke University Press, 1998), Pp. 377–403.[edit]

I see no problem whatsoever with adding a major scholarly reference: It discusses many of his paintings, so, I believe, it helps verifying the list (and as for Conservation-restoration of Thomas Eakins’ The Gross Clinic, the article contains much discussion of this specific painting).--77.125.203.207 (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your industry in placing publications by Ray Carney in dozens of articles is the kind of single-purpose activity usually associated with a conflict of interest, which is one reason this spamming has attracted attention. List of works by Thomas Eakins is a list which is not at all concerned with the meanings of the paintings. The text is about nothing other than the provenance and catalogue of the paintings, their physical dimensions and whereabouts. Anything added as a "Further reading" suggestion should be relevant to creating or verifying this list. The Carney article interprets several Eakins paintings with attention to their relationship to pragmatism; it is nothing like a list and is out of place here. Conservation-restoration of Thomas Eakins' The Gross Clinic is about the conservation history of the painting; the article about the painting is The Gross Clinic, where the source you added is appropriate. Ewulp (talk) 23:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_works_by_Thomas_Eakins&oldid=1204945942"