1. Text objects - such as a web page
2. Non-text objects - such as an image
These two require two different search functions:
1. Text-based search - searches the object itself
2. Metadata search - searches descriptive metadata
In my opinion, all content *should* have descriptive metadata (date written, author, so on). But only non-text objects actually require it - you can't search for 'picture of a horse' unless someone has actively tagged a picture with the word 'horse'.
The problem lies in the subjective nature of descriptive metadata, because tagging/taxonomy-ing/controlled vocabulary-ing is HARD. Really hard. And collecting that data is even harder, and utilising that data is harder again.
Case in point: I have a bunch of hobbies. One of them is perfumes.
If ever there was a set of content that didn't meet with text-based search criteria, it's scent. English doesn't even have scent words, or flavour words - we rely on 'smells like' and 'tastes like' because, outside of sweet/salt/bitter/sour/umami, there are no words (and 'umami', a taste-enhancement molecule found in MSG and parmesan cheese, is stolen from Japanese anyhow).
Because of this, perfumes are the perfect place to examine the efficacy of non-text search. How can I, as a perfume enthusiast and buyer, find new scents?
With difficulty.
Here are some comparisons of my favourite perfumes (I stress: despite what you're about to read, I love these scents), compared against their marketing blurbs.
Hermes Eau de Merveilles
They say:
An enchanting fragrance that encapsulates the spirit of wood, the memory of oceans and the sparkle of a constellation.
I say:
Smells like cake, only sexy. Exactly like I think spice would smell like. (Gentlemen: this is the one you want to buy your lady. You will love this so much.)
Guerlain Samsara
They say:
It was in China and Tibet that Jean-Paul Guerlain sought the inspiration necessary to create Samsara.
Samsara is a Sanskrit word that has its roots in Hinduism. It signifies the cycle of birth and rebirth, the perpetual voyage from one existence to the next, the wheel of life that keeps on turning.
Samsara is an invitation to serenity and harmony, with oneself and with the world. It is a voyage between East and West, Orient and Occident, an homage to the woman who is ever in search of serenity.
I say:
Smells like sand. No organic content, apart from one element - it's sexy (more civet than musk). Exactly like what I think Arrakis would smell like.
Shiseido Zen
They say:
Something to do with amber and 'wood breath'.
I say:
I only bought it because it has space rose in it. Not sexy.
Hermes Kelly Caleche
They say:
The unexpected caress of leather among flowers. Mimosa, iris, tuberose, and climbing rose. A floral perfume touched by leather.
I say:
A wood fire that just went out, and someone dropped some fresh/wet herbs on it. And some booze. Probably gin. Not sexy.
Jardin sur le Nil
They say:
A perfume of light and life, generous and sparkling. A bottle reflecting the shimmering green and ochre tints of the banks of the Nile River appreciated by women and men alike.
I say:
Smells like orange peel and mud, on a very hot day. Not sexy.
Chanel No 5
They say:
Femininity is timeless
I say:
Smells like perfume. Ur-perfume. Super-sexy.
The thing is, I would never search 'orange peel' when looking for a new scent, but neither would I search 'femininity is timeless' or 'cycle of birth and rebirth'. And I know that the results from using a frangrance wheel (yes, that's a Thing) are mid-lame to very-lame.
If I looked for a 'sexy' perfume I would get something vile and musk-ridden (don't fret, it's all synthetic now) with a celebrity branding attached, not something that smelled like cake. Similarly, a search for 'not-sexy perfumes' wouldn't take me to the best not-sexy perfume sources - Japanese houses like Shiseido and Kenzuo and Issey Miyake. (The cultural reasons for this are extensive and, for this post, irrelevant. But Japanese perfumes are amazing.)
Scents - they just don't translate to text.
And yet, a little part of me thinks - hopes - that this is a solvable problem. There will be a way to search for scent. One day.
...and to be honest, pretty much this whole post is to announce how thrilled I am to see that Hermes' new Eau Claire des Merveilles is now out.
Mmmmmmm... fresh cake. Delicious.

Love this post!
ReplyDeleteI sympathise, hugely. I have such a hard time finding perfume. I go in and explain that I like citrus and fruit and foody smells generally (but also green smells and some woody smells), and I come out with stuff that smells to me like a Turkish brothel (Disclaimer: I would imagine).
Mostly this means that I don't wear any perfume at all.
Now I'm wondering about trying some of these that you mention. Because mmmm, cake.
If you've got the dosh, Hermes make the *best* perfumes. The best. Very unusual, too - One of the Kellys might be what you're looking for.
ReplyDeleteThis lady (https://www.dshperfumes.com/index_pdba.asp) also makes some nice scents, especially the historical recipes (some of her modern stuff smells... kind of American?) and she does (cheap) sample vials. Mahjoun is nice as a spicy/foody scent, kind of what you'd think America thinks India smells like, and Cimabue smells exactly like rice pudding. Exactly.
Zoe,
ReplyDeleteYou've totally nailed it. When I talk about metadata challenges from now on, I will be citing this blog post.
Wow.
Excellent post.
ReplyDeleteIt has me wondering, do people in the perfume industry have a standard lexicon for internal communication about their product (apart from the names of the ingredients)? They wouldn't get far with the marketing style burb ('The unexpected caress of leather among flowers' ???) so I'm imagining they need something more scientific. Ditto the whisky, tea and coffee trades.
@drtraceymadden -
ReplyDeleteYes, they do - there are very sophisticated controlled vocabularies, some of which are actually set up to reflect scents at the molecular level (makes sense when you consider most scents are synthetic, which is good when you consider the traditional sources of musk and civet) (I wouldn't google that if I were you ;) )
There's also a very large IP industry around scents, so a lot of that information is proprietary and will exist only internal to one company.
Most major/branded perfumes come from only a couple of (anonymous) houses, so those houses have gigantic R&D budgets/proprietary knowledge. Guerlain, Hermes, and Chanel still do all their work in-house.
@mrch0mp3rs -
ReplyDeleteYou are so sweet. (Almost exactly the same as I wrote here applies to wine-tasting, too - but worse, because that's scent *and* colour *and* taste! Good fun, though!
This is excellent. Echoes an archiving debate that is sloshing about at work. Some want to archive under what the thing *is* such as an html page or a video or a graphic. Others want to archive under the named project. I was stunned by different viewpoints and how it seemed they would never meet. The issue is not resolved yet. The archiving system we are discussing is Windows Explorer. :) I have this strong urge for tagging and that can be done somewhat. Each person has a right to their definitions or interpretations, so it must be the system that is "wrong".
ReplyDeleteAren't we into folksonomy here? Of course, you still need to remind people to add all the metadata. Discipline is still crucial. With tagging and a folksonomy, each person can add their own tags and all should be findable. Of course, if Mary files hers with "cake" and you don't see that, you never get to add "cake" as a tag because you never see what she filed...
Sigh. Anyway, great angle here.