MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Robert A. Baron" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:34:35 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
At 09:01 AM 1/21/97 PST, Amalyah Keshet wrote:
>>On Tue, 18 Jun 1996 22:10:46 -0700  Anne M. Derousie wrote:
>>>The discussion of photographic reproduction rights comes at a time when
>>>our museum has instituted a new policy regarding the fee schedule for
>>>such rights. We have experienced a great deal of resistence to the new
>>>fees and that raises the following questions I would like to ask of
>>other
>>>institutions:
>>
>Resistance will wear away quickly. Museums are notorious for having been
>naive in pricing, and our clients have to get used to the idea that we
>have "grown up" and joined the ranks of other businesses. The "product"
>we sell is by no means worth less -- and is often worth more -- than
>that they can obtain from other sources.

Museums should be aware that they essentially have what amounts to monopoly
control over the publication use of objects in their collection.  Some
photo-service agencies have taken advantage of their status as the sole
representative of certain works to create price schedules that are, if
anything, predatory.

It is not uncommon to hear art historians complain about how much they must
pay for the rights to use certain photographs in their scholarly non-profit
small press-run articles.  I'm not talking about the fair compensation
Amalyah cites for the time and effort needed to research and prepare
photographs, but about outrageously burdensome fees that scholars are
forced to pay because publication is a requirement of their academic
status.  A friend of mine told me recently that to publish a small b&w
image in a scholarly article in a small journal she had to pay an agency
$450.  The b&w photograph she received as a loaner was a tattered 8x10.

Such actions are, obviously, a disservice to the clientele, but they
ultimately blot the reputation of the owning institution.  Lack of regard
for the quality of the image offered for reproduction reflects poorly on
the owner, and outlandish prices will eventually move scholars to other
sources -- including public domain archives as they come available.


===========================
Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93
Larchmont, NY 10538 (USA)
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2