Number 232 - August 2002

Google's Image Search
by Bob Thomson rjthomson@attbi.com
I take no credit for this. Indeed, the credit is due to the creators and maintainers of that best of all search engines, Google (www.google.com). When you first bring up plain ordinary Google you are presented with a box into which you type the key words on which you wish Google to search. Above the box are the choices Web, Images, Groups, and Directory. When Google is first invoked, the Web screen appears indicated by the fact that the word Web is displayed in white letters within a blue box, while the other words are black characters on a white background. Selecting each of these choices brings up a different screen. If you click on Images, the word Web will revert to black letters on a white background and the word Images will appear in white letters within a navy-blue box, indicating that Images screen has been selected and you wish Google to search for Images rather than web sites, titles or key words. If you call up the Groups screen, the box background is Yellow while clicking Directory shows the word Directory in white on a Green background.     As users of Google well know, searches are very fast and you will be amazed at how quickly the responses to your requests appear. Here are some example for Tacoma/Seattle users to try. With Images screen selected enter "Space Needle" (without the quotation marks) and a screenful of images of the famous 1960 Seattle landmark will appear. Or try "Stadium High School" and behold Tacoma's famous turn-of-the-century building with its castle-like spires. "Union Station" is a little too general, because there are lots of Union Stations. But the entry "Union Station Tacoma" will, indeed, show the well-known Pacific Avenue, Tacoma landmark. The images will be in thumbnail form, of course.     If you click on an image it will reappear in the upper half of a split screen showing its source web page in the lower half. You may be surprised at the number of different views as well as the puzzling inclusion of some images that seem to have no bearing on the subject of the search. These, no doubt, are the result of the search criteria and algorithms used by Google. For example, some of the graphics	shown are some of the "art work" supporting a web page such as directional arrows or other "clickable" icons. The advantage of this search technique is that you may, dare I say will, discover images that you would never find through a normal web search.     Obviously, you can search for fine art by an artist's name or by the name of the painting, sculpture or whatever. Or you can search for photographs of places or people, line drawings and the like. Or you could search for the work of a specific photographer, such as Ansel Adams. How current are the listings? Just for the heck of it, I entered "Museum of Glass" to see if Tacoma's latest cultural edifice would appear and "Guess what?" There it was, including a picture or two of Dale Chihuly, eye patch and all--the Tacoma native and artisan largely responsible for popularizing glass blowing in the Pacific Northwest--and the museum itself.     You can place restrictions on the searches by selecting Preferences while in the Web page and then the appropriate level for the intended viewer. The choices are: 1. Use strict filtering, 2. Use moderate filtering and 3. Do not filter my results. The aim, of course, is to prevent or otherwise restrict the inadvertent display of explicit sexual or pornographic images, to protect those of us who have led sheltered lives. However, depending on what you are searching for these can be quite restrictive. For example, at the most restrictive level, a search for images of the CN Tower, in Toronto, once, perhaps still, the world's tallest free-standing structure, yielded only one screen of images, perhaps because the tower was deemed a phallic symbol by Google's arbiters of taste. The mid-range selection seemed to not limit the display, yielding upward of 25 to 30 screens of images of the tower and related fare. The least restrictive level seemed to yield about the same number. Display of explicit images at the mid level is normally somewhat restrictive -- or so I've been told.     Google's Images display is worth a try. You may even like it. I did! ... still do!
Number 232 - August 2002