One of the things about searching for stuff on the internet is that you get different levels of success depending on different things. For instance, suppose you want a picture of oh, to pick an example at random, a kitten in a hat. Google “kitten in a hat”, and thousands of pictures of kittens in hats will present themselves for you to pick from.

Conversely, if you want something quite specific but not very common, you may find it surprisingly easy. A couple of years ago I needed a picture of a horse in a dirndl to send to a colleague (don’t ask). I put the words Horse in a Dirndl into Google images, and got back a lot of pictures of horses, one of which was, indeed, wearing a dirndl.

Sadly, my theory that the more unusual something is, the easier it is to find was disproved when I just Googled Iguana in a Bonnet and got nothing but pictures of iguanas. Iguana in a Bonnet is, by the way, a good example of the way the internet searches. If you did your homework yesterday you’ll know that search engines ignore common words like In and A unless the phrase is enclosed in inverted commas. All of the pictures of iguanas I discovered were of those reptiles in the Bonnet House Museum in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, since Google had searched only on “Iguana” and “Bonnet”  “Iguana in a bonnet” produced nothing, although Google Images did hopefully offer me all the pictures of iguanas in the Bonnet House Museum which I had already seen as the result of the same search without quotes.

To be fair, Iguana in a Hat got an excellent result. Still no picture of an iguana in an actual bonnet, but there was one of an iguana in a pink wig and pink heart-shaped sunglasses, which I call a result. (Kitten in a bonnet, of course, produces a perfect result immediately, thus proving, I guess, that kittens are a) commoner b) more photogenic and c) more amenable than iguanas, although that last may be open to debate.)

More tomorrow.