Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Museum Pictures
#1
and once again I'm not quite sure where to put them...

I took some pictures in the Regensburg and Nuremnberg museums, and while I'm not allowed to put them online, I can share for research purposes. Contact me if you are interested. Items include

fragments of scale armour
a decorated greave and cheekpiece
various items of everyday use
funerary art
a relief showing what is most likely a provincial prostitute
Smile
cupric alloy whistles (for centurions?) Smile
The Fornovo San Giovanni shield boss and sword
armlet purses
Der Kessel ist voll Bärks!

Volker Bach
Reply
#2
Why are you not allowed to put them online?
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#3
Quote:Why are you not allowed to put them online?

Copyright issues. Basically, I can take pictures for private use, including teaching and research, and I can share with friends and researchers, but putting them online publicly would be 'publication' and some museums feel very strongly about that.

Most pictures probably wouldn't be a problem, for all that, but this varies from collection to collection, I do not exactly recall the terms of each, and the last thing I want is 'cease and desist' letters. I know for sure that Mainz is very, very strict - I had to sign a non-publication agreement in duplicate.
Der Kessel ist voll Bärks!

Volker Bach
Reply
#4
I understand. I have had similar experiences in the Ostia Museum.

At the same time, I have the impression that most museums have decided that Internet photos have such a low-resolution that they are really dangerous. I visited Mainz last September and my friend Marco (a professional photographer with ditto camera) could do whatever he liked.

Still, it is indeed better not to upset museum authorities. Recently, I received a complaint about a copyright infringement. When I saw the amounts of money they demanded, I was impressed. Fortunately, I could prove that I had behaved correctly, but if I had not kept a copy of a letter of eight years ago, I might have been forced to settle for a large amount of money, because that would be cheaper than hiring a barrister.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#5
Carlton and Jona,

Can you elaborate, if you have time, on exactly what kind of conditions the museums put on usage? I think it would be good for everyone to know for future reference "just in case" :?

Also, does anyone know if I were to walk into a museum with sketchpad and pencil and draw items, would they be prone to the same attitude/restrictions?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#6
Hi Carlton,

While I immediately agree with Jona that it's not a good thing to upset the museum athorities, I'd be interested to learn if they really claim copyright?

I mean, as long as you took the pictures, it can never be a copyright issue because they neither took the pictures nor created the object, did they?

On the other hand, if you made an agreement under which you could take pictures as long as you did not publish them, they are within their right.
nevertheless, it's still not a copyright issue, but an agreement under which you could take pictures.

Since all these items are cultural heritage, no one can claim it's theirs under copyright. If it were, you could not make a copy/reconstruction of them! If no rules about taking pictures existed, they could not claim copyright either, even if they are the legal owners of the ogjects in their museum. Well, since museums mostly are not private but state-run establishments (and subsidies complicate the matter if they're private), you could claim your right as a citizen to publish them. As long as you don't make any money from publishing them (which is the real issue behind copyright) the issue should not be a big one.

Have they seen your pictures? Can they tell who really took them? Yes, I'm pushing the boundaries of your agreement here. :twisted:
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#7
Don't forget that one of the greatest uses of copyright law is to ensure that the material does not misrepresent the subject or its owners, or is shown out of context (a quality issue). If they have reconstructed the object from fragments they may have a case that it is their creation and therefore intellectual property maybe?
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#8
As far as I know, most museums restrict the use of flash light and a standard. If you want to make professional photos, these are the basic requisites, so forbidding their use makes sense. Several museums, like the British Museum, have no restriction at all.

During the past two years, I have visited about eighty museums all over Europe, plus Turkey, Iran, Pakistan. I encountered three exceptions to the rule I mentioned:
  • * the Royal Museums of Art and History in Brussels, which asked me to fill in a form, demanded a fee (8 euros?), and let me make my pictures without flash;
    * the Ostia Museum is inconsistent. Sometimes, it is not permitted to take photos, sometimes, they allow it. I think it has much to do with the mood of the guards.
    * The Lahore Museum asked me to buy a permit, which cost a couple of rupees. I don't remember how much, but it was not an amount that a westerner who has paid for the flight to Pakistan cares about.
As for publishing on the web: the document I had to sign in Brussels forbade the publication in print. This has an amusing result: I can publish a photo on the web, but if you decide to print it, I break an agreement! The kind lady who accepted the form and I had a good laugh about this construction, and she said that she could not imagine that the museum would make a point of publishing JPEGs, which are, after all, usually not of a quality that would make me a competitor of the museum itself. On the other hand, I will of course never sell these photos.

The real problem is, in my view, not taking photos in museums. If you put on-line a picture from a book (usually a scan), that is an infringement of copyright. Some artists have hired agencies to demand a payment, and I think this is their right to do so. I used to make scans in the past and wrote letters to the publishers, but they never replied - probably because they underestimated the web's impact.

I bought the right to use one picture for my website ([url:k6juu5xt]http://www.livius.org/le-lh/legio/xv_primigenia.html[/url]; coin at the bottom of the page). It cost me 60 euro. That is expensive (the usual tariff is lower) but you will all admit that it's worth every cent.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#9
Quote:I'd be interested to learn if they really claim copyright?
I have never had problems with museums, but I did receive an angry letter from the representative of a well-known and rightly admired military artist. I had indeed put on-line scans of nine drawings by this artist. The agent demanded an awful lot of money but backed off when I told that
  • (a) I had found six of these pictures on-line, where they had been published without naming the artist; it was I who recognized the drawings and added this artist's name;
    (b) that I asked permission for the other three pictures, but never received an answer from the artist's publisher;
    © that I was still willing to pay the normal amount of money for an illustration, and not the outrageous price they demanded.
The agent did not reply. Which is a pity, because now this artist received nothing at all, even though I was willing to pay 9x$40, which is still a good price.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#10
Regarding taking pictures inside a museum, indeed safeguarding the collecting is mostly the reason why they prohibit that. I've been told that flashlight hinders the security cameras, which is why they don't allow it. The Leiden museum also prohibits the use of a tripod, so taking pictures becomes very very difficult.

Regarding publication of their pictures, indeed that's a good claim for copyright infringement.

Still, if you do take pictures in a museum, I still maintain that internet publishing can't be a cause for them to claim copyright.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#11
Quote:if you do take pictures in a museum, I still maintain that internet publishing can't be a cause for them to claim copyright.
Sometimes I wonder if the museums should not pay us: after all, aren't websites the best kind of publicity they can wish for?
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#12
Exactly!! Free publishing!
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#13
Quote:Carlton and Jona,

Can you elaborate, if you have time, on exactly what kind of conditions the museums put on usage? I think it would be good for everyone to know for future reference "just in case" :?

At Mainz I had to sign that the pictures I took were for my personal use only, and any kind of publication would have to be agreed to by the museum in advance, and they would charge me fees per picture. This was before the internet age, so I don't think they were thinking about websites, but the text clearly said *any* kind of publication, for-profit or not. I got their oral assurance that using them in a classroom would be OK, though.

At Hamburg KGM I was instructed that no commercial publication of any kind would be allowed, nor would I be permitted to use the pictures to make replicas, but then told the museum would not prosecute unless it felt its reputation was harmed. ???

At Istanbul Archeological Museum I was told that the pictures could be used for research and reconstruction to my heart's content, and used in not-for-profit publication, but should not be put into digital format due to control issues.

I don't know what the legal basis is exactly, but generally there is such a thing as the right to control the image of art you own (or was, before the last change of our copyright law Smile ). And frankly, given how difficult some museums are about pictures (it takes ages to convince some guard that I know what I'm doing and won't use the flash on their papyrus collection) I'd rather not piss off any of them. We depend on their continued goodwill.
Der Kessel ist voll Bärks!

Volker Bach
Reply
#14
I have photos from many of the museums I visit, but I use 800 ASA film, no flash. In the Central Museum of Roman History? Mainz, no one objected to taking photos, I have a nice photo of Peter Connolly standing next to one of his paintings on display. At Kalkriese? no problems with photo and video. In one museum near Paris, the guard demanded a fee for letting me take photos, I don't speak French, so not quiet sure what the fee was, private or museum.... In Britain, I had no problems taking photos again, no flash, 800 asa film, I have a monopod which can double as a cane.

In Warsaw, no photos were allowed of the Romans artifacts in the "Art Museum", sad because they had a stele I wanted. I was able to take photos in other places, without much problem. In most places in Ukraine, the museums have a nominal photo fee and a video fee. In the USA depends on the museum....
Caius Fabius Maior
Charles Foxtrot
moderator, Roman Army Talk
link to the rules for posting
[url:2zv11pbx]http://romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=22853[/url]
Reply
#15
Quote:At Mainz [..] the text clearly said *any* kind of publication, for-profit or not.
Well, they can demand that, before you take pictures. It's not a question if they're within their rights, but it's for the photographer to take or leave it. Now if they allow it without those rules, they can't slap you with a fee afterwards.
Quote:At Hamburg KGM I was instructed that no commercial publication of any kind would be allowed, nor would I be permitted to use the pictures to make replicas, but then told the museum would not prosecute unless it felt its reputation was harmed. ???
That's normal. No commercial gain from their stuff, or it's a loss of income for them. I can understand that. Also, no harming the museum - you can't publish the pictures when you're going to claim they did a rubbish job or something. Very understandable.
Quote:At Istanbul Archeological Museum I was told that the pictures could be used for research and reconstruction to my heart's content, and used in not-for-profit publication, but should not be put into digital format due to control issues.
Heh. You can't digitise your pictures lest you'll pass one to a friend, who passes them to a friend.. Of course they can't claim that. Either you take pictures or not, they have no control of how you store or distribute them, as long as you don't publish them and tell all who get them of the stipulations. They might have told you not to look at each picture for more than a minute! Big Grin Rubbish.
Quote:I don't know what the legal basis is exactly, but generally there is such a thing as the right to control the image of art you own
Most of what I read here is about us not making money from their collection (which sounds fine) or not damaging the material while making pictures (sounds fine too) or us not bringing the museum into disrepute (sound fine, as long as they do a good job). All else is just for the museum to ask and us to agree to. Besides that, the objects are not their in a way that they can control the copyright, as long as the pictures are yours and not theirs.
Quote:We depend on their continued goodwill.
That we do! But within limits, I hope.[/quote]
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Policy on posting pictures from a Museum? Magnus 2 1,101 11-03-2011, 04:23 AM
Last Post: MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS
  Pictures of Roman artifacts in museum het Valkhof Batavian 2 1,719 11-07-2010, 11:52 AM
Last Post: Batavian

Forum Jump: