Thankyou David for your comments.  As a museum photographer, I agree
completely, any work I perform for a museum is clearly the institution's
property.  It is a "Work-for-Hire" situation which frowned upon by some
professional photography associations.  But I feel these photo assoc.s don't
understand the need for the museum to have full copyright to the images of
the artifacts.

Working as an employee for a museum it was always difficult to obtain a
photo credit on specialty shots (signature images specifically created for
an exhibit/event or publication).  I would never expect my name to appear on
every documentation photo request. But the excuse would be that "if we give
you a credit (on special photography projects) we'd have to give art
handlers etc. credit".  Obviously, this is a misguided notion.
Photographers, graphic designers etc. are judged on the "look" of their work
and need the credit line to actually prove they did the work.  It was also
considered to be a "professional courtesy" by that institution and only
happened occasionally.

Thanx again for your input, it is quite stimulating.

Lucille


>From: "David E. Haberstich" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Asking once again!
>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 01:12:57 EST
>
>In a message dated 01-02-01 22:41:48 EST, Shirley Albright wrote:
>
><< Make sure you work out in advance the copyright issues related to the
>print and the negative.   We had a situation once where museum objects were
>photographed by a person who held the negative in perpetuity.   Everytime
>we
>needed a print we were at the mercy of his pricing
>  structure and his time line etc. >>
>
>This is an important point.  In my opinion, it's absolutely essential when
>a
>museum engages an outside photographer to photograph collection objects
>that
>the museum obtain all rights and ownership of the negatives.  In other
>words,
>it should be a work-for-hire agreement.  While I am a strong proponent of
>photographers' rights and sympathize with their efforts to protect their
>creative achievements, there are many situations in which it just doesn't
>make sense for them to retain copyrights and ownership of negatives and
>transparencies.  It's important for museums to have full control of images
>of
>their collection objects.  An agreement in which the photographer transfers
>copyright and ownership of the work to the client will usually be more
>expensive, and properly so, but it's worth it, for the reason cited above
>and
>for a number of others.
>
>Photographers have fought hard for recognition as creative artists and for
>control of their copyrights, and as a photography curator I certainly
>support
>their efforts.  They're well advised to avoid work-for-hire agreements in
>photojournalism, advertising photography, and many other fields.  But I
>think
>it's appropriate to separate or distinguish creative work from jobs which
>simply require technical skills more than artistic panache.  Most flat-copy
>photography of works of art and the straight photography of "3-dimensional"
>museum artifacts is sufficiently routine and formulaic--even when technical
>ingenuity is required to light and photograph difficult surfaces, textures,
>and shapes--that there is minimal warrant for a photograher to retain
>copyright. Museums should insist on work-for-hire agreements for
>photographs
>of their artifacts.  Nevertheless, it would not be inappropriate for the
>agreement to stipulate a photographer credit whenever an image is used or
>reproduced.
>
>Museum control of the image file assumes that the museum can also house and
>retrieve the negatives and transparencies, which I strongly recommend.  If
>the museum somehow cannot do this and the photographer has to provide
>storage
>and continuing service, museum ownership of the file and copyrights may be
>problematic. But what am I saying?!!  If a museum can house an artifact
>collection, it ought to be able to figure out how to house and access a
>library of surrogate images.
>
>David Haberstich
>
>=========================================================
>Important Subscriber Information:
>
>The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
>http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
>information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
>message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
>read "help" (without the quotes).
>
>If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
>[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
>Museum-L" (without the quotes).

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).