wwp@yahoogroups.com:
RE: ZKM globorama hassle
Sphereworks 2008-Jun-05 14:25:00
The point is here is that these people took images from the WWP and
publically used them without the permission from the photographers. This is
called THEFT !! If we don?t do anything about it then others will think
they can help themselves to.
Even if it is a charity, school, museum or that sort of thing it doesn?t
matter ? there is always a value to the image. They can?t go out and take
all of those images themselves can they, it would take months/years and lots
of money to do. So the images have to be paid for, or if the photographer
gives permission then for free. And I?ll tell you something else, a lot of
charities etc out there have bucket loads of cash !
Regarding the Globorama project it is unfortunate what has happened as yes I
agree it looks quite good. If asked I may of donated an image or two to the
project, but was I asked? NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And yes the cropping issue is really bad. It?s not about how much relevant
information is in the image, it?s the distortion that it can cause, and it
looks like a badly produced image. The photographers name is on the image
and it looks like they have submitted the image in that condition. Nobody
would allow their images to be shown like that, well I certainly wouldn?t.
If for any reason the Globorama project gets buried then I?m sure someone
else will do it, doesn?t look that complicated just costly.
Pete
HYPERLINK "http://www.sphereworks.co.uk"www.sphereworks.co.uk
From: #removed# [mailto:#removed#] On Behalf Of Josh
Sent: 05 June 2008 15:06
To: #removed#
Subject: Re: ZKM globorama hassle
--- In HYPERLINK "mailto:wwp%40yahoogroups.com"#removed#, Kathy
Wheeler <kathyw@...> wrote:
>
> You must agree that the principle of copyright is important?
Yes I agree.
> Then regardless of who abuses it and why, it's wrong.
But your conclusion is b/w. There is a 'grey-zone'. Keep in mind, that
Bernd Lintemann at ZKM developed and raised an experimental arts
project. Without knowing him personally, I guess in the beginning
he/they thought 'what material can we use for testing/presenting'? And
then it is quite an honour, when they think about the WWP.
> Unauthorised cropping of a spherical pano to a thin strip is abhorent
> to many WWP contributors who consider the integrity of the entire
> pano, and it's context in the WWP to be of great importance.
Come on - is this really so bad? The globorama is by construction a
thin cylindrical screen and no dome. In 90 percent of the pictures
there is not enough relevant information, but only sky above or grass
below ... You can start developing a spherical projection room, go on
- but be aware, using wwp panos for testing is expensive! ;-)
> If you support the principle of copyright at all, then you must
> understand that to ignore the actions of people like ZKM is
> undermining that principle. Their past and proven abuse of copyright
> must be resolved.
Yes I agree - but I would accept an apologize and write no invoices.
>
> That is not to say that once that sorry chapter is resolved that we
> cannot potentially work with them.
Do you really think, they will want to work with people who sent
invoices or went to court?
Again - what I want to tell you all: there is a great difference in
how pictures are used! If a multinational company steals your artwork
for a big campaign that costs millions, then go to court and fight for
your rights!
ZKM is school and museum. They don't have endless budgets. Lintemann
does a lot to develop virtual reality. Don, Markus & Co - we all - do
a lot to develop virtual reality. We are sitting in the same boat. I
can't believe we are fighting each other.
ZKM has had and has no realistic chance to contact each individual
panographer for THIS kind of project: it is an interactive way for the
observer to choose what pano he/she likes to watch. Like at the WWP
site. ZKM can't even control how often a pano is brought up and how
long it is watched.
I believe this is quite an important discussion also about the future
of WWP. Any interested party or potential buyer should have an easy
way to contact one, some or ALL panographers. And we panographers
should have the possibility to agree/disagree.
Most participants in this discussion here claim only the mistake of
ZKM using their panos - and ignore any positve benefit. This is sad.
Cheers
Josh
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.6/1484 - Release Date: 04/06/2008
16:40
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.6/1484 - Release Date: 04/06/2008
16:40
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]