HCB exhibit in Kyoto: minor regret

[flip]

It was a nice show. Although I was familiar with the pictures, it was nice to see them well-reproduced and simultaneously viewable.

I regret not clicking a picture of the girl going from print to print with her phone, clicking snapshots of every picture on the wall, in spite of the gallery selling a collection text/album. I should've called her a thief since the staff obviously didn't care to confront her.

It is probably a sign that my time in the country is done when I wonder if she'd have behaved similarly at a gallery of Japanese work. *sigh*

The show continues for 3 more weeks near Kawaramachi.

 

[Jockos]

I should've called her a thief since the staff obviously didn't care to confront her.

What did she steal?

 

[btgc]

She can't make coffee table book from her snaps, obviously. If she didn't buy the book, it's same if she wouldn't buy a bottle of water after security check and before boarding. Some do and some don't, world is still running.

 

[flip]

Points taken, all.

HCB doesn't get the money; presumably his heirs do. Whether they deserve it is a debatable issue.

I can't justify why, but I would have been less bothered if she weren't methodically snapping every photo in the exhibition. Much like MP3s ~ I can see the value as viral marketing in small doses, but lifting entire catalogs a mere hop and skip away from the legit vender just seems cheap. That the docent/vender didn't care enough to enforce rules pertaining to presentation of the work perhaps furthers the impression that photography is not something possessed of (intellectual) property value.

I suppose you're right: the world still runs regardless.

 

[Archlich]

It's the same as snapping picture of sculptures while you are in Florence. Trophy.

Or maybe she's just taking them for future reference. Who knows. Since the exhibition didn't prohibit photography people can take what they want, like reproductions of the reproductions.

 

[ampguy]

She probably checked with the staff before photographing each photo. I do. It's very possible she is taking the photos for a friend or family member who cannot attend the exhibition, and may not have the interest in buying and owning the book.

Usually the owners of the prints, or representatives of the owners, can determine if photography is allowed, right?

 

[btgc]

My sense of enforcing Ordnung kind of resonates with this, but if this were public place and she could mess up property or harm anyone, I'd consider engaging. But in private property there are people who establish policies and are responsible for enforcing them. Sounds "leave me alone" but no, I'm just respecting someones job and responsibilities and leave them to them.

 

[flip]

Trophies sounds right. Kinda like photographing your food.

As to policy, I actually inquired. The policy was no photos. As hinted, this is incredibly strictly enforced at Japanese culture-specific sites, but not so in this case.

 

[btgc]

As to policy, I actually inquired. The policy was no photos. As hinted, this is incredibly strictly enforced at Japanese culture-specific sites, but not so in this case.

If not in this case, then maybe they actually didn't care?

 

[zauhar]

Trophies sounds right. Kinda like photographing your food.

As to policy, I actually inquired. The policy was no photos. As hinted, this is incredibly strictly enforced at Japanese culture-specific sites, but not so in this case.

That's what would p-ss me off - 'no photos' doesn't seem to apply to cell phones.

When a museum guard once told me to put my camera away, I told him 'I assume you're keeping a sharp eye on everyone with a phone'. He was not amused. I saw many people taking photos with cell phones, even p&s with flash, no one said a word.

Maybe she asked for permission, but I doubt it. I wouldn't call her a thief, what's offensive is that the policy is not applied consistently and fairly.

Randy

 

[ampguy]

like this?

like this?

Photo by Jeffrey Friedl ( http://regex.info/exif.cgi?url=http://regex.info/i/JF4_023870.jpg )

Trophies sounds right. Kinda like photographing your food.

As to policy, I actually inquired. The policy was no photos. As hinted, this is incredibly strictly enforced at Japanese culture-specific sites, but not so in this case.

 

[noisycheese]

Would Facebook try to screw HCB's estate?

Would Facebook try to screw HCB's estate?

Here's a question: For the sake of discussion, let's say that she now uploads the images of HCB's photographs to Facebook.

Will Facebook then arbitrarily claim copyright ownership of HCB's images and do what they please with the images, like they do with everyone else's images - and get away with it??

 

[flip]

I assume that somewhere in the legal mumbu jumbo FB stipulates that users only upload that which they legally own copyright permission to.

 

[Richard G]

I have had an interest in painting and art since childhood, but I too took some photographs of paintings in the galleries I went to in my early 20s. But unlike the Japanese man in the Museé de Jeu de Paume I saw in 1983, I did not step two paces right and photograph every picture on the wall. I might now not bother at all with such pictures, but for me it was a record of being there in Italy in front of a Titian I had admired in reproduction for years. And its setting was part of the experience. The more I am absorbed by photography, the less inclined am I to use it in this way. I think the obligate chronicler has not considered the use of the chronicle nor how it might interfere with their experience of the thing chronicled. I see that sort of fanatical chronicler as someone lost trying to reach home. I don't want to criticize them nor even pity them. They are entitled to their way of being. I don't think their strategy works even for them, however.