Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

artsandculture.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 49 posts

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#31

Post by Daub »

Palomides wrote: post #21
mbivert wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean, directly? I remember seeing a few download links for some images, but many of them aren't directly available (random example: [0]) But otherwise yes, it's one of the best online archive. Wikimedia & some museums's websites are good sources of high-quality material as well. [0]: https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/nicolaas-rubens-wear...

many of the high res images on wikipedia/wikimedia of notable paintings come from this google project (the category for it has ~25,000 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Files_from_Googl... )

The super high resolution photos are taken with a special rig. Details: https://www.dpreview.com/news/1947958268/google-art-camera-u...

From what I recal, the software used for stitching is more like Excel than Photoshop.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#33

Post by refulgentis »

sulam wrote: post #30
refulgentis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can mostly survive on autopilot, & it's s0o0o0o much easier to shut something down for not having > X0 million users, than it is to shut it down a clear charity case because it doesn't make money. (it's not supposed to!) After 7 years there, the greatest lesson I walked away with is motivated reasoning really matters.

Very very little at Google survives on autopilot. There’s a constant drumbeat of required changes, whether they be accessibility, regulatory (DMA, hurrah), internally motivated changes (material design++) etc. For anything to survive there must be someone who cares and is willing to invest in it. This is a large part of why stuff gets killed, the default there is for things to die. Yes there are strategy changes too,…

(context: Xoogler, knew people on the team, am partially culpable for the last material++)

This is autopilot at BigCo. No?

There's still a pilot in the cabin.

Low stakes. No big investment required. No politicking. Unaffected by latest $X trend. No release sprints. No release slogs.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#34

Post by refulgentis »

buildbot wrote: post #27
refulgentis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can mostly survive on autopilot, & it's s0o0o0o much easier to shut something down for not having > X0 million users, than it is to shut it down a clear charity case because it doesn't make money. (it's not supposed to!) After 7 years there, the greatest lesson I walked away with is motivated reasoning really matters.

It seems heavy than maintaining something like Reader, but perhaps that's incorrect.

I would wager so, it's not significantly changed much in years.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#35

Post by lupire »

buildbot wrote: post #27
refulgentis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can mostly survive on autopilot, & it's s0o0o0o much easier to shut something down for not having > X0 million users, than it is to shut it down a clear charity case because it doesn't make money. (it's not supposed to!) After 7 years there, the greatest lesson I walked away with is motivated reasoning really matters.

It seems heavy than maintaining something like Reader, but perhaps that's incorrect.

Reader wasn't unmaintainable. It was cancelled because it competed with Google+.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#36

Post by andrei-akopian »

doctorhandshake wrote: post #28

This site is great but am I wrong in thinking the title of this post is editorialized against HN policy?

You could be right, after reading through the guidelines it does seem on the edge. Which exact policy do you think it is violating?

I was trying to relay that it is an enormous resource by Google but somehow nobody talks about it. (At least I haven't heard about it, which is odd considering its size.)

The title does sound a bit clickbaity, please tell me what title I should have used instead.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#37

Post by 43920 »

andrei-akopian wrote: post #36
doctorhandshake wrote: post #28

This site is great but am I wrong in thinking the title of this post is editorialized against HN policy?

You could be right, after reading through the guidelines it does seem on the edge. Which exact policy do you think it is violating? I was trying to relay that it is an enormous resource by Google but somehow nobody talks about it. (At least I haven't heard about it, which is odd considering its size.) The title does sound a bit clickbaity, please tell me what title I should have used instead.

I think the typical approach is to use the regular site name (so just "Google Arts and Culture") and let people click on it assuming there's something interesting about it to justifying being posted. That doesn't work super well when the original title is vague, like this one, but I think it does correspond to this guideline:

> Please don't do things to make titles stand out, like using uppercase or exclamation points, or saying how great an article is. It's implicit in submitting something that you think it's important.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#38

Post by eek2121 »

My only advice beyond what others have said would be to try and archive it. Google has show themselves to be anti-consumer unless they benefit, so I expect they will kill this as well.

Also, in case someone wants to give me crap, If someone gave me traffic numbers and such so that I know what to expect, I would absolutely be willing to mirror this provided I can find it, and unlike Google, for me, fund != profit. If you work at Google and are confused, please just do a search on Duck Duck Go for the Google graveyard and find a sane job after you realize your current job will end soon.

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#39

Post by stevage »

andrei-akopian wrote: post #36
doctorhandshake wrote: post #28

This site is great but am I wrong in thinking the title of this post is editorialized against HN policy?

You could be right, after reading through the guidelines it does seem on the edge. Which exact policy do you think it is violating? I was trying to relay that it is an enormous resource by Google but somehow nobody talks about it. (At least I haven't heard about it, which is odd considering its size.) The title does sound a bit clickbaity, please tell me what title I should have used instead.

"I didn't know existed" is clearly editorial.

You could just make it: "Google Arts and Culture site"

Re: Google Arts and Culture site I didn't know existed

#40

Post by automatoney »

doctorhandshake wrote: post #28

This site is great but am I wrong in thinking the title of this post is editorialized against HN policy?

Taken as a whole, the title guidelines feel more focused on titles of articles, rather than whole website titles. I can understand the complaint, but in my opinion this title is fine. The title just feels a little... bare without the note.
Post reply on HN