Re: Classic Trains on CD
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
As a photo dealer myself ($5 each for an 8 x 10, postpaid), I can agree that prints are getting harder to sell. Until sometime in the 1990s, I had a chronic backlog because I had so many orders, but then it melted away and I have never had a backlog since. Occasionally someone contacts me to ask if I still sell prints, but that is the end of it. No order follows.
Only at Cocoa Beach do I ever sell many prints, but again i regret that I will not be able to make it this year. I just had a corneal transplant which will keep me out of action for the next month.
John C. La Rue, Jr.
Bonita Springs, FL
From: Tim O'Connor <timboconnor@...>
To: main <main@RealSTMFC.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Dec 28, 2019 12:22 pm
Subject: Re: [RealSTMFC] Classic Trains on CD
Magazines are not photos. I have issues of MRH (a FREE online publication with photos)
that are 300 Megabytes each in size, and they are PDF files.
Kalmbach could EASILY insert new advertising material into old issues of magazines if
they were really worried about copying and sharing PDF files. Advertisers pay for eyeballs,
so they'd be more than happy if people cheated, and probably spend enough to more than
cover the scanning and distribution costs - Just as they do for MRH and others.
ALL methods of digital copy protection can ALL be defeated. After all, software engineers
understand how it works, and them who create these methods will know how to get around them.
The days of selling paper copies of the same image over and over and over are drawing to a
close. Besides which, inks and paper are bad for the environment. :-)
On 12/27/2019 1:01 PM, Bob Webber wrote:
This is an issue with digital images - people *WILL* copy, share and post on the internet. They have since the inception (which is one reason Microsoft's process is so convoluted and pricey now). They will also copy & share things that were specifically and explicitly forbidden by the license they signed (same).
You may disagree with the concept, then you shouldn't sign the license (which is a whole issue unto itself with EULAs being printed in -5 pt script and running on for chapters).
What is going to happen is that institutions selling photos, drawings and other things digitally will have to increasingly turn to software that blocks attempts to download, copy, and other wise use something. Which will drive up costs and cut down on usability, flexibility, and customer satisfaction. When some knowingly disregard promises they made, it hurts every body.
You may wish for better copies in PDF form (which isn't the best vehicle) and be able to ...well...make it portable (as the name implies) for your own purposes. That is and likely will be fine. It's the people who post such images on the internet (and or pass copies along to friends and manufacturers as their own) that kill offerings and drive up prices.
I'd love to hear "solutions" (off-line or at Cocoa) as we have had to stop supplying some materials until some of this is resolved. It *WILL* make images harder to view, it *WILL* make images harder to come by, it *WILL* result in "policing" - people insist that anything on the Internet must be free, and any material feeding it must be too. They also insist that anything they "own" is theirs to do with as they please. That will kill more than you know.
People have said $6 is too much to pay for an 8x10 print. I'd dearly love to see how they propose to store stock and to visit shows on less. It can not happen. Smithsonian charges $50 - or more. Others do as well, mainly due to "pirates", but also to sensibly defray costs. Feeling that it is the sellers problem (to pay for acquisition, maintenance, repair, and logistics) is simply uninformed or deliberately and willfully ignorant - and the reason many things available in the past & today will not be leaving archives - you'll have to visit them in order to look, and cameras and phones will not be allowed.
At 10:44 AM 12/27/2019, Tim O'Connor wrote:
My issue with Kalmbach is their proprietary images - If the images were good quality in