More geekery

This morning I had occasion to play with Google's image search, that is to say by searching of the bottom of a painting called 'Amy' by Winifred Nicolson, the wife of Ben Nicolson, a painter in whom I have taken an interest in the past.

Google Image failed on this, although searching for the picture by using text keys turned it up fast enough. For example, the key 'amy-226270', this last being part of the file name of a copy of the picture held somewhere or other. With this particular key only working when you have already found the picture in question. Nevertheless, Google clearly did know about the picture and my theory was that its image search was not clever enough to take account of being given bits of pictures.

Next step, try larger chunks of the picture in question. Still no luck.

Getting desperate, try the picture as a whole. Still no luck.

Then I try a chunk of the 'Mona Lisa' obtained by applying the MS snipping tool and Google tells me that it is probably a version of the Mona Lisa that someone has fiddled with.

Try the same thing with a chunk of the 'Laughing Cavalier' and it just find the right picture without comment. Try a smaller chunk and Google still manages OK. Although by this time it might be cheating, having noticed that I am taking an interest in this particular painting.

But my theory does seem to be wrong. Google Image does take account of the possibility of being given bits of pictures, but it only takes any trouble with well known or popular pictures. And 'Amy' does not qualify.