By all means, if you can contact the copyright owner , do so. But as many have said here, fair use is a slippery slope. Think about it like this: you are pretty good at strumming a guitar. Maybe you have a good voice. One night you strum away And record your own version of James Taylor's "Fire and Rain", and it's great. If all you ever do is play that recording in your own home for you and your friends, you have not infringed on a copyright. If your dorky brother in law (twice removed, aka Cousin Eddie) posts it to whatever social media outlet, there may be problems. Zero distribution plus zero economic gain usually means no infringement.
thanks all, this is all very helpfull. I will try contacting the publisher of the book and see where that leads me.
mlehman Drumguy If you are just reproducing a one-off print of something for your own personal use, there really is no copyright infringement. Infringement comes into play when you you copy and distribute (for profit or not) You're referring to what is called "fair use." It's a complex question.
Drumguy If you are just reproducing a one-off print of something for your own personal use, there really is no copyright infringement. Infringement comes into play when you you copy and distribute (for profit or not)
You're referring to what is called "fair use." It's a complex question.
The advice to seek out the owner of the copyright and seek permission to use the photo for the stated purpose is the best advice. To say that if you are just reproducing a one-off print of something for your own personal use, there really is no copyright infringement, is not necessarily accurate.
I will offer a personal example. I saw a magazine cover with an excellent color photo of a large downtown passenger train station that would be an excellent backdrop for my layout, a one-off print of something for my own personal use. Fair use? I decided to contact the copyright source, a state historical museum. The copyright owner gave me written permission for a fee which I paid with the understanding that I would not turn around and sell the backdrop.
Be careful how you view and treat the term "fair use".
Rich
Alton Junction
DrumguyIf you are just reproducing a one-off print of something for your own personal use, there really is no copyright infringement. Infringement comes into play when you you copy and distribute (for profit or not)
You're referring to what is called "fair use." It's a complex question. Being from academia, I can tell you it varies what actually qualifies for fair use, which is why I avoided bringing it up. If the OP was writing a paper to present at a conference and wanted to use a pic of the item in question, such use would probably qualify.
However, if it was decided to go ahead and write a book and also include the pic, then it might not be, requirng instead you to get standard permissions. Yes, largely this is because there is a clear profit motive in the second example, which isn't identifiable in the first example. But yopu can get into lawyered-up territory real quick here.
That said, I'd say the use contemplted by the OP is one that might be problematic. He doesn't have to sell something done like this to profit from it's enjoyment. However, I've known some grad students who could argue as the day is long that in a case like this they would be "researching" the item. And they might be able to get away with it, too, amazingly enough.
Mike Lehman
Urbana, IL
If you are just reproducing a one-off print of something for your own personal use, there really is no copyright infringement. Infringement comes into play when you you copy and distribute (for profit or not). Beyond that, scanning any physical thing (other than a transparency or negative) and trying to enlarge it to backdrop size will show a lot of artifacts, regardless of your skill with Photoshop (even multiple layering with various Unsharp Masks has limits). But you could add some filters and get a somewhat artsy yet cool look.
Can you determine whether the pic is his or was a part of his private collection? If so, then try contacting the publisher.
If it was instead cited as from a collection that was not his, then what he did was ask THEIR permnission to use it in his book, but he doesn't have permmission to permit others to use it. You should instead check with the holder of the collection/pic it was drawn from as they would be the copyright holder in this case, not Krause.
That said, you may come up with dead ends and no way to gain the permissioon you seek.
In that case, presuming you do the work and only privately enjoy it without any. profit seeking, then I wouldn't sweat things too much. Keep any documentation of your attempts to contact the copyright holder and proceed to do what's best. It's not quite "fair use" but you did youyr best.
A first step might be to contact the copyright holder or publisher and obtain permission. As part of that process they may be able to direct you to better "media" such as an enlargement, or to the current holder of a slide or negative original.
Keep in mind that with modern digital 'enhancement', you might be able to get acceptable 'ten-foot' quality by scanning the picture you have, then removing screen/dot or moire pattern, doing some selective deresolution, etc. You could also do some more creative things to the image in the process. Technically there will be some point where the changed image qualifies as 'new work' -- but I'd see about getting a written permission of some kind anyway.
A lot of photos I find in books are quite available in the online Archives of various levels of Government and are free for the taking. This one is in the British Columbia and City Of Vancouver Archives and I have seen it in many locations on the wall. I hope to do the same with it someday.
Click on it to supersize it.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
Since he is deceased, the real trick is finding out what happened to his photo collection. It may have been donated to some museum or a railroad historical society. That happens fairly frequently, if someone was well known enough to have books published.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
According to Amazon he published in the 70's to 90's. He also collaborated with a couple other authors. I don't know that the publisher would keep photos that long.
You can still buy photos from famous photographers like Ansel Adams. However train photos are a niche business.
If he was famous enough, the family may still sell his photos, or they could be in the dumpster. Maybe the publisher would have a lead. Or you could research obituaries and look for next of kin.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley
I found a photo in a book by the late John Krause that would look great blown up and mounted canvas style to hang up in my house. does anyone know if it is possible to locate and purchase a photo that you see in a book?