Groundspeak Portal

Smithsonian Art Inventory

Since this wonderful resource has been mentioned, I thought I'd start a thread on it.

I know I've been alerted to it before, but for some reason it didn't really click, but I've found it increasingly valuable.  I wish more categories to which it applies would include it in the category description as a resource, and maybe even provide an optional variable for the IAS control number.

I think the search function is difficult to use.  There is no field for geographic location - like state or city or zip code.  Sometimes the "Owner" field can help.  But, sometimes it's just hard to get enough information to do the search.  But, I'm learning.

Does anyone know for sure if there is a way to contribute to it - particularly images?

In some ways it would make a great category.   Somewhat like the National Register of Historic Places, it provides an objective list of sites to be included, with somewhat standard data fields.  And a control number.  The main problem is that almost everything listed there could be included in one or more of the existing categories, and I think that is a LOT of redundancy.  That's speaking of sculptures, anyway.  There are many other types of art included.  And the problem with that is that a lot of them are located in museums.  In general, I don't think it is a good idea to waymark items on display in museums.

Any other thoughts on this?

I use this resource for many categories from Abstract Art to Fountains to World War I  and Civil War  memorials.  It may not have a search by state however if you click the Highlights tab (or just go to the Quickstart link) it will have listing for Outdoor Sculpture by State/City.  By clicking state it will list the cities and the number of sculptures listed in city.  By clicking city link it will list show all the sculptures.

I have considered it as a possible category for the same reasons.  I would restrict it to what is listed to outdoor sculptures because if you include paintings there are museums where 100's if not more are listed at same location and also many museum prohibit photography.

The About tab on the site gives a brief description of how to contribute to the site. 

Thanks for the tips!

Well, it's another idea I'm not sure will fly, but here's a group to explore the concept.

Art Archivists

Open enrollment, of course.

I have used this listing as an information source a few times and have discovered a few items in my neck of the woods.  One in particular was Prarie Odyssey WM74J6 I posted a link on this waymark to the web page of the statue.

The site is a great research tool when putting together a quality waymark.  It is quite cumbersome to navigate, but I have been using it more and more and am getting used to it.  Sometimes when you strive for a high quality waymark a lot of research is what it takes.

I have actually been contemplating putting together a new category using the site as the core because a lot of the items in the inventory are located in other countries (sold or presented to other nations) Would meet the global intent of the game as well as get waymarkers to actively build an index of currently where these U.S. National Treasures are located so we can see our heritage.

I haven't used this before but will now. It is a great resource.

If a category was started how would you handle items that have been destroyed.

At a glance two of the items on the list for my area have been destroyed outright. Others are moved from where they indicate they are located.

I used the Smithsonian Site to find a Lincoln  to waymark, and also to find a monarch.

More recently, I am working in a town 80 miles from home, so I use it to give me ideas where to go for a waymarking lunch.

I find it much more satisfying to waymark things that I know have information available about.

Try to find the items that still exist.   Destroyed items could not be visited so they wouldn't make it as a waymark.

Category Description:  To find and waymark any and all items listed in the Smithsonian Art Inventory database.  Putting together this category would allow us to find and see our national treasures, some (many) of which are not general knowledge. This category would become an active database for the Smithsonian Art Inventory and could posiibly be used to update the official database.

Posting Requirements:

2 pictures of the item. 1st picture to be of the Full Item and the 2nd to be of the general location so a visitor will have a clue of where to look since many of these precious art objects are located inside structures.  Posted coordinates to be of the items location, or if it is inside a structure then coordinates should be for the nearest public entrance.

Cost of Entrance if the items are located inside and require an entrance fee.

Title of the Waymark would be the title as it is listed in the Smithsonian Art Inventory database, then the city/state or region/country if the items was found in a region that doesn't have geograpically segregated states.  This way a crosscheck (for review) would be possible, as well as the Smithsonian Reference Control Number XXX XXXXXXX (example: Smithsonian Reference Control Number IAS NE000149) 

 

Right now I am looking for a Statue of Liberty (small replica) that was presented to Colorado Springs and is suppose to be sitting in front of our town hall.  Looks like I might to have to do some interviewing to try and find it or what happened to it.

As with all new categories it would be refined here in the forums before ever being submitted.

This site should have a Useful Links section, preferably linked on the waymark submission form.

I just added a link to the site for one of my waymarks.  I notice their info is outdated, though.

Just about everything I've seen in the Smithsonian Inventory of outdoor art could be waymarked in another category. I can't remember what I saw that I couldn't think up a category for.

Yes......you are correct.  I hadn't thought about the inventory in the database falling into existing categories.  Pretty much most of the items listed do fall into other categories. That's why I will always propose a category before submitting it.  The waymarking community will ensure that it has merit.  Well most of the time.  Also, making the suggestion here will make it a quality category with all of the right stuff to make and keep it viable and active.  I wish some of the categories had been scrutinized in this forum before they ever got to the general Approval state.

I also think we could try to get a useful links section.  Sometimes the resarch for quality waymarks can be very extensive.  The Useful Links section could be a great starting point for a lot of folks.

Oh well.......guess I hit a logical dead end for the Category proposal.  But publishing the database website this gives all of us a very good research reference site.  I see that dinoprophet has already done so on their waymark.

gt.us:

Just about everything I've seen in the Smithsonian Inventory of outdoor art could be waymarked in another category. I can't remember what I saw that I couldn't think up a category for.

Something as significant as the Smithsonian should have its own category IMHO.

BQ

gt.us:

Just about everything I've seen in the Smithsonian Inventory of outdoor art could be waymarked in another category. I can't remember what I saw that I couldn't think up a category for.

I second this. 99.9% of pieces can be waymarked in existing categories. What makes sculpture A worthy to be in the Smithsonian Inventory and not Sculpture B?

saopaulo1:

gt.us:

Just about everything I've seen in the Smithsonian Inventory of outdoor art could be waymarked in another category. I can't remember what I saw that I couldn't think up a category for.

I second this. 99.9% of pieces can be waymarked in existing categories. What makes sculpture A worthy to be in the Smithsonian Inventory and not Sculpture B?

I also agree here. The survey appears to be just from someone going through the area in the 90s and cataloging some of the outdoor art. Some of it not even that good as far as art goes.

It is a great resource but based on the previous categories already in play not needful as a category unto itself.

I won't persuing a new category for the Smithsonian Art Inventory.  That Dog has now been whipped to death.  Lets just leave it as a nice research database and maybe persue the possibility of a User Index of 'Useful Links'   I know I currently use it that way.

This forum is working exactly the way it is suppose to.........very logical and useful discussion.  Good Ideas and Bad Ideas both get their discussion.  That is exactly why I will only post any New Category Ideas here first.  

Thanks to all...............Keep on Waymarking and Keep having fun like I do.

the blue quasar:

gt.us:

Just about everything I've seen in the Smithsonian Inventory of outdoor art could be waymarked in another category. I can't remember what I saw that I couldn't think up a category for.

Something as significant as the Smithsonian should have its own category IMHO. BQ

It should, but I don't think this is it.  The art in this database doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Smithsonian, and it's way too big, IMO.  The Detroit Institute of Arts alone has over 1100 entries.  That would be a lot of waymarks within 0 mi of each other.

Also it is not 100% accurate.

I stumbled across a sculpture that is longer in the location depicted.

In fact, none of the long time residents ever remember seeing that sculpture - ever.  The photo clearly shows it existed, though.

Now, I have mystery to solve.  Does anybody know of any meddling kids and a dog with a speech impediment?

cldisme:

Also it is not 100% accurate.

I stumbled across a sculpture that is longer in the location depicted.

In fact, none of the long time residents ever remember seeing that sculpture - ever.  The photo clearly shows it existed, though.

Now, I have mystery to solve.  Does anybody know of any meddling kids and a dog with a speech impediment?

The site not being 100% accurate is a great reason to have a category devoted just to it. I don't see the hullabaloo with overlap (f.k.a. cross-posting). If we were so concerned, we wouldn't have even considered a category for the National Register of Historical Places if it were suggested today. ;)

I have to somewhat agree with a category being devoted to the S.A.I. I think it would be a value resource for them as well as allowing more people to see their site. They might even find a new group of people within the waymarking community that would contribute monuments and sculptures from their own home towns. I also agree that not everything in the S.A.I. looks to be worthy of being in their ranks in the first place. In the case where you have 10 or more sculptures in a small area then waymark them once as a large group. I'd also like to see them expand into another category of murals. I'm gonna drop the link to this thread into the mail box of the S.A.I. I already helped to update 2 of the items there from my own hometown. They obviously don't see as much traffic as they should and I think waymarking would be a great way for them to keep up to date on all of their inventoried items as well as expanding their inventory. Swizzle

Redneck Parrotheads:

cldisme:

Also it is not 100% accurate.

I stumbled across a sculpture that is longer in the location depicted.

In fact, none of the long time residents ever remember seeing that sculpture - ever.  The photo clearly shows it existed, though.

Now, I have mystery to solve.  Does anybody know of any meddling kids and a dog with a speech impediment?

The site not being 100% accurate is a great reason to have a category devoted just to it. I don't see the hullabaloo with overlap (f.k.a. cross-posting). If we were so concerned, we wouldn't have even considered a category for the National Register of Historical Places if it were suggested today. ;)

I like this ^

BQ

I think the NRHP has sites that don't fit into other category. Many of the houses on there wouldn't fit anywhere.

If the National Geodetic Survey had a website with the 10,000 best benchmarks, would it be ok for a category? Benchmarks could already fit into the US benchmarks category.

saopaulo1:

I think the NRHP has sites that don't fit into other category. Many of the houses on there wouldn't fit anywhere.

If the National Geodetic Survey had a website with the 10,000 best benchmarks, would it be ok for a category? Benchmarks could already fit into the US benchmarks category.

They don't... and yes it could be just as bear sculptures all fit in figurative sculptures.  Defined lists can make for good categories.  I view this category much like the Wikipedia category, many if not most can be cross listed, location data on Wikipedia is often not very accurate and somethings listed in Wikiepedia no longer exist (same as NRHP)

Maybe it would be a better idea for these sites to create their own GPS based game of their inventories. Then again we have a wikipedia and a NRHP category what would one more cross posted category hurt if it was created an operated by someone from the S.A.I. They could really benefit from us already being a well established GPS site. They could easily expand their inventory by creating their own category and having set requirements. Once they have a new submission they just add it to their S.A.I site. I  think it'd be great to have at least a member each from these 2 or 3 resources to take a part in waymarking and see what happens. Swizzle

Redneck Parrotheads:

I don't see the hullabaloo with overlap (f.k.a. cross-posting). If we were so concerned, we wouldn't have even considered a category for the National Register of Historical Places if it were suggested today.

if this is the case why do we have bear statues, it is a complete subset of figurative sculptures?

the problem with overlap is when two categories are too similar. how about this overlap: a very high percentage of AGS marks are also on the NRHP, are they not? yes, there are differences in the two listings, but there is a lot of overlap. but these two categories have their own merit.

i know i have missed posting some NRHP by a short time--they were destroyed. And part of the goal of that category is to bring attention to the historic places so that at least some of them might be spared.

chapterhouseinc:

Redneck Parrotheads:

I don't see the hullabaloo with overlap (f.k.a. cross-posting). If we were so concerned, we wouldn't have even considered a category for the National Register of Historical Places if it were suggested today.

if this is the case why do we have bear statues, it is a complete subset of figurative sculptures? the problem with overlap is when two categories are too similar. how about this overlap: a very high percentage of AGS marks are also on the NRHP, are they not? yes, there are differences in the two listings, but there is a lot of overlap. but these two categories have their own merit. i know i have missed posting some NRHP by a short time--they were destroyed. And part of the goal of that category is to bring attention to the historic places so that at least some of them might be spared.

No most American Guide series  waymarks are not on National Register and for sure most NRHP are not in American Guides.  Is there some overlap, yes, what I find interesting is that the American Guide talking about the new what ever building being built and now that 'new" building is now considered historic and is listed on the Register.

swizzle:

Maybe it would be a better idea for these sites to create their own GPS based game of their inventories. Then again we have a wikipedia and a NRHP category what would one more cross posted category hurt if it was created an operated by someone from the S.A.I. They could really benefit from us already being a well established GPS site. They could easily expand their inventory by creating their own category and having set requirements. Once they have a new submission they just add it to their S.A.I site. I  think it'd be great to have at least a member each from these 2 or 3 resources to take a part in waymarking and see what happens. Swizzle

For a group like the Smithsonian, and I'm biased, it makes no sense to create a webpage and all that goes along with that when Waymarking already has the necessary framework in place.

I just think it would be great content to capture here.

To be honest, I've used "Groups" for other things that Waymarking... but I cannot get my caching friends to accept it, because it is waymarking. They would rather join a Facebook group... I'll never figure humans out {snicker}

BQ