Daguerrotypes are quite interesting in terms of preservation and copying.
From our article on them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daguerreotype
[That's one of the better 'start' articles I've seen, for those discussing article assessment accuracies.]
"The daguerreotype is a negative image, but the mirrored surface of the metal plate reflects the image and makes it appear positive in the proper light. Thus, daguerreotype is a direct photographic process without the capacity for duplication." (this is repeated later in the article in different words: "lack of a negative image from which multiple positive "prints" could be made")
"The image produced by this method is extremely fragile and susceptible to damage when handled improperly. Practically all daguerreotypes are protected from accidental damage by a glass-fronted case."
"The best-preserved daguerreotypes dating from the nineteenth century are sealed in robust glass cases evacuated of air and filled with a chemically inert gas, typically nitrogen."
That would make slavish reproductions quite difficult.
There is a nice bit here as well, about patents versus 'free' invention:
"Instead of Daguerre obtaining a French patent, the French government provided a pension for him[2]. In Britain, Miles Berry, acting on Daguerre's behalf, obtained a patent for the daguerreotype process on August 14, 1839. Almost simultaneously, on August 19, 1839, the French government announced the invention as a gift "Free to the World.""
Quite ironic, really, considering how long the technology lasted before being replaced by other methods (mainly the ambrotype in the late 1850s, about 10 or so years later). The main reason, it seems, being mercury poisoning.
"Unlike film and paper photography however, a properly sealed daguerreotype can potentially last indefinitely."
In the copyright situation today, and with the advent of the internet, what challenges face legislators comparing transient media with those that can potentially "last indefinitely"?
Carcharoth
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM, BrianBrian.Mingus@colorado.edu wrote:
A daguerreotype of a well adjusted [[Phineas Gage]] holding the rod that impaled his frontal lobes was recently discovered. It will be published in The Journal of the History of the Neurosciences imminently. It was, in my opinion, correctly uploaded to Commons under the Public Domain. It is, after all, an uncreative photograph of a daguerreotype made in the 1850s by an unknown photographer.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Phineas_Gage.jpg
That said, have a look at the copyright text of the image claimed by the gallery that took the photo.
http://brightbytes.com/phineasgage/index.html
**NOTE* We are not claiming copyright to the work of an anonymous 1850s photographer but to the photograph we made of this object in our possession. Since you can't upload a daguerreotype to the internet and no one else could possibly have photographed this object for over 30 years, the only photographs available are the ones we have made.*
*For several years we have had an informal business supplying images in our collection http://brightbytes.com/past_tense/index.html to publishers, film, and television producers. We often grant permission for educational and non-profit usage.*
*High resolution photographs without a watermark are available for reproduction. Contact us for information on usage fees.*
*My reading of this is that they claim copyright of the image and that they often allow educational and non-profit institutions to use versions of the images that contain watermarks. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l