[AT] Grain Binders and nudity....

Wed Mar 3 09:00:24 PST 2004

I'll certainly suggest it, but I do know of one specific problem with 
that approach- thumbnails, which I've already seen popping up. But I 
will suggest it to Andy Kraushaar at the Society.

> Guy  what about changing the Historical Society logo from a blocked 
out
> black and white to something like a watermark,  every bit as 
permanent and
> identifyable but not so intrusive to the eye of the viewer?
> 
> Charlie
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Guy Fay" <fayguyma at execpc.com>
> To: "Antique tractor email discussion group" <at at lists.antique-
tractor.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 7:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [AT] Grain Binders and nudity....
> 
> 
> > Great in theory. Real life and epierience suggest the following:
> >
> > 1. There's 1500 hundred photos up now. So everyone makes a copy, 
the
> > archives doesn't make money, and it closes down. What about the 
other
> > 250,000 IH photos?
> > 2. Everyone makes a copy on their home printer. But almost no one 
uses
> > archival paper and inks in their home machines. No one has photos 
after
> > 5-10 years.
> > 3. Many of the photographs in the archives are kept with their
> > provenance- which means that there's information not only from the
> > photo, but where the photo is located, or the other photos they're 
with.
> > In fact, if everyone is keeping a set of photos at home, you'd 
WANT the
> > label from the Historical Society on it to tell that it was an 
original
> > IH photo, rather than a photograph taken 50 years after.
> > 4. Even if the photos are stored digitally, file formats tend to 
change.
> > Changing formats are a big problem in digital preservation-there's 
stuff
> > the state's produced less than ten years ago that no one can read 
today.
> > You want a physical image around for some time yet. Yes, .tiff 
seems to
> > be pretty stable at the moment, but times change.
> >
> > Funding the archives is a great way of ensuring permanence. Yes, 
fires
> > do happen, and other disasters, but archives have professionals 
who can
> > deal with those issues. A proper archives isn't just a bunch of 
boxes on
> > a shelf. It's active preservation, guardianship, access, and 
collection
> > of more for future generations.
> > Tim Bivens wrote:
> >
> > >I am going to have to agree with most of what Cecil
> > >and Walt have said on this subject but for a somewhat
> > >different reason than has been mentioned. With all due
> > >respect to Guy and others that have mentioned all the
> > >hard work that so many have put into saving these
> > >photos and advertising items. That is precisely the
> > >reason that I hope there are as many copies made of
> > >them as possible. That way there is a better chance
> > >that future generations can have copies of them and
> > >more people can enjoy them. What we leave to future
> > >generations is much more important than copyright
> > >laws. I don't really care how they take the trip
> > >through time or if they are pirated or somebody makes
> > >money off them or whatever. We will all be dead a
> > >hundred years from now and this argument will be long
> > >forgotten but I hope there are some copies of these
> > >around for our great grandkids to enjoy. If I put in a
> > >lot of hard work to preserve an old photograph I would
> > >be glad for anyone that wanted a copy to have it. I
> > >would be much more concerned that it is preserved for
> > >posterity than worrying about whether me or anyone
> > >else makes money off it. The idea of "this is my copy
> > >and it's the only copy you can't have a copy of it" is
> > >a selfish attitude whether it is an individual,
> > >museum, or whoever. I know someone is going to come
> > >back with the argument that the Wisconsin museum is
> > >going to always have a copy but they may not always be
> > >available to to the public. The originals could get
> > >destroyed by fire. They could lose funding for their
> > >website. Etc. There a lots of ways these could become
> > >unavailable to the general public. Why would anyone be
> > >worried about a copyright on something as old as the
> > >1895 Buckeye ad that brought this whole topic up? I
> > >say let anyone that wants to copy let them have a copy
> > >of it. I have a rather nice copy of it copied on
> > >quality photo paper and hanging on my wall right now
> > >(with the garbage cleaned up off the right side).
> > >Probably going to frame it and my kids can have it
> > >when I die. So sue me.
> > >
> > >Tim Bivens
> > >Glen Rose, Tex.
> > >
> > >
> > >--- DAVIESW739 at aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>The part i can't understand is if these were given
> > >>to the Wis, Histerical
> > >>com. to post on the net free for all to see then who
> > >>is being damaged if one
> > >>makes a copy even if he sells it and what can you
> > >>get for a copy anyway. Not much
> > >>I would assume. And if you put it on your website
> > >>one here and one there who
> > >>would even know it.  I don't think anybody is going
> > >>to just download everything
> > >>that they put up and then make their own site and
> > >>charge to see it because
> > >>that's just plain dumb. Why buy something that is
> > >>free anyway. people sure do
> > >>get over excited about copyrights.
> > >>Rosie ODonnal sued a local radio station for using
> > >>the name Rosie as if she
> > >>was the only person in the world with that name, she
> > >>lost of course and Spike
> > >>Lee sued a Sat. channel for calling itself Spike TV
> > >>he also lost. Some people
> > >>just go overboard on this stuff. If they were
> > >>loosing big money from someone
> > >>using their copyright then i say go after them but
> > >>remember its only a picture
> > >>and there has to many more copies out there owned by
> > >>others. And you can only
> > >>hold the copyright as the original person who took
> > >>the picture and that only
> > >>good for a specific time some of these pictures must
> > >>be way out of their
> > >>original copyright by now. Also even if you make
> > >>changes by adding that sign on the
> > >>side or correcting bad spots or other things you
> > >>still cnnot copyright it as
> > >>yours it belongs to the guy who took the picture.
> > >>
> > >>I say just put them up and let things be as they are
> > >>why make everyone mad as
> > >>they view the pics with all that garbage that the
> > >>crook doesn't care about
> > >>anyway.
> > >>Well i have spent to much on this I agree with Cecil
> > >>clean the darn things up
> > >>and post them to the net and then forget about all
> > >>the work that you have
> > >>donabeen paid for its all past history by now.
> > >>
> > >>Walt Davies
> > >>Cooper Hollow Farm
> > >>Monmouth, OR 97361
> > >>503 623-0460
> > >>_______________________________________________
> > >>AT mailing list
> > >>http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >__________________________________
> > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > >Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster
> > >http://search.yahoo.com
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >AT mailing list
> > >http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AT mailing list
> > http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
> 

-- 
CoreComm Webmail. 
http://home.core.com