New York-based photography student Vicki Thai has a project titled Family Photographs that consists of images created by splicing (by tearing and reassembling) family photographs shot during two different times.
Read more…
Here’s another sign of the changing times: so many camera shoppers are turning to the Internet for deals that some cameras shops are now charging fees for customers who want to test out their cameras. The Daily Telegraph writes,
Camera House Caringbah owner Craig Mackenzie charges a $30 “explanation fee” to customers looking to test out his high-end cameras.”I’ve got to pick the people who won’t screw me over,” Mr Mackenzie said.
“If I pick the wrong one, he’ll waste half an hour of my time and will then ask me to write it all down.”
A survey conducted by the paper of more than 1000 people also revealed that 61% had tried out products in local stores before actually buying them online, and half of those people had done so more than five times.
(via Daily Telegraph via Sydney Morning Herald)
Image credit: Camera Store by Helga’s Lobster Stew
Earlier this month, the Daily Mail published some photos taken at a Dalston polling station during the British General Election by Emily James of Just Do It.
James’ photos were originally uploaded via TwitPic. Later, they were republished on several other sites, including The Guardian and Times Online, initially without permission or compensation. However, The Guardian and Times both offered James retroactive compensation. The Times offered £250 for using one photo, along with a brief emailed apology for using the image without permission.
The Daily Mail, however, initially incorrectly credited the image to someone else, then removed the credit line altogether. James sent them with an invoice for £1170 — a rate set at £130 and multiplied by three per image to compensate for their lack of knowledge or permission.
The picture editor at the Daily Mail responded, saying:
Thanks for the invoice.
Unfortunately we cannot pay the amount you have requested, these images were taken from twitpic and therefore placed in the public domain, also after consultation with Twitter they have always asked us to byline images by the username of the account holder.
We are more that happy to pay for the images but we’ll only be paying £40 per image.
James, aware of the difference between TwitPic and Twitter Terms of Service, responded to the Daily Mail:
I’m afraid that you are wrong about the terms of publishing on Twitpic. If you read the terms of service you will see that copyright is clearly retained by the poster:
http://twitpic.com/terms.do
Third parties who wish to reproduce posted images must contact the copyright holder and seek permission.
You should have contacted me if you wanted to use the photos, as every other news outlet did. had you done so, you might have been in a position to get the photos for £40’s each.
However you didn’t contact me, even though this would have been very easy to do, nor did you inform me that you had used them. Instead, I had to uncover that you had used them, that one of them was not credited even with the correct twitter account, and that none were credited as I would have asked them to be.
James and the crew at Just Do It Films say they are still waiting for full payment and an apology.
This seems to be a similar issue that photojournalist Daniel Morel has with news agency AFP over whether images distributed over TwitPic and Twitter warrant free public distribution.
It’s no secret that Polaroid has seen its share of financial troubles over the last few years. This year, Polaroid will be forced to bring some of its historic prints and images to Sotheby’s auction block in order to offset debts incurred as a result of its current bankruptcy, the New York Times reports.
In the lineup are some 400 photos by Ansel Adams, and work by artistic legends such as Andy Warhol, Chuck Close, and Robert Mapplethorpe. The auction will be held in Sotheby’s New York, the Times cites that is expected to bring in $7.5 million to $11.5 million.
Featured photographers have mixed feelings about the auction; many feel that the historic collection is museum-worthy, the Times quotes:
“It’s an amazing body of work,” Mr. Close said in a telephone interview. “There’s really nothing like it in the history of photography.” But, he added, “to sell it is criminal.”
The collection was initiated and owned by Polaroid founder, Edwin H. Land, who made sure creative minds of his time had a chance to use and tinker with his product, and give him hands-on professional feedback, the Times noted:
It was a handy arrangement, the collection’s longtime curator, Barbara Hitchcock, explained: Polaroid provided some of the greatest talents around with equipment and film, and they gave the company photographs. “Experimentation was encouraged by Polaroid,” Ms. Hitchcock added. “It was a mantra — experimentation, creativity, innovation, pushing the envelope of photography.”
These early Polaroid images provide fascinating glimpses into the work of famous photographers, as well as into the early development of a consumer camera culture that transcended merely functioning as an industry — though ironically, the company would later fall on hard times as a struggling industry.
Some of the remarkable pieces up for auction can be viewed on the NYT’s Lens Blog.
(via The New York Times)
