toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Tony makes an excellent point! - but it reminds me of the Guy
Dunscomb collection of
fabulous Southern Pacific photographs that was bequeathed to the
and may therefore never be seen again by humans. Perhaps
millions of years from now
intelligent life forms will rediscover them buried in a deep
underground vault and
wonder "What the heck were they thinking?".
Some museums (like the Huntington) are like the computer joke
about "write only memory".
On 12/27/2019 1:18 PM, Tony Thompson wrote:
Bob Webber wrote:
What is going to happen is that institutions selling
photos, drawings and
other things digitally will have to increasingly turn to
blocks attempts to download, copy, and other wise use
Which will drive up costs and cut down on usability,
flexibility, and customer satisfaction. When some
disregard promises they made, it hurts every body.
Comments about abuse of licensing and permission are
quite correct. But I think Bob is wrong about what
institutions "are going to do." In fact, my impression is that
many institutions have given up on this issue, and are
increasingly posting uncontrolled images on the web. Selling
digital images is a VERY low-income idea, and I suspect many
are simply deciding to make images available. Otherwise they
languish in darkness.
People have said $6 is too much to pay for an 8x10
dearly love to see how they propose to store stock and to
visit shows on
less. It can not happen. Smithsonian charges $50 - or
Of course this is entirely right. But those who
charge huge prices, such as the Smithsonian, either believe
they can get it because they have great material, or are
trying to make images into a "profit center," as business
schools faithfully teach you to do. I'd bet the profit is
microscopic and shrinking.