No subject

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, Brian<Brian.Mingus at 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 at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>