[log in to unmask] wrote:
> IMHO, Mr. Adams, who snapped the pic, is still the creator of the
> _intellectual content_, regardless of what format the instantiation of his
> work may take. Saying the person who digitized the pic is the creator
> would be like saying the typist who types up a manuscript of a book is the
> author of the book.
Claiming that Ansel Adams is the creator of the digital image is like
saying that the author is the person responsible for the typographical
errors in the manuscript. Or worse - that the architect of the Sydney
Olympic stadium is the person who built it (he must be a hard worker).
The responsibility for intellectual content is still preserved by
DC.Rights and DC.Source. Failing that, you always have DC.Relation.
DC.Creator, from my POV, is useful for recording the person responsible
for a manifestation (reprint) or derivative (translation) of a work.
DC.Source was there from the beginning to record the material from which
the current work/manifestation was drawn from. DC.Rights was there from
the beginning to allow recording of copyright.
You already have three fields in which to acknowledge Ansel Adams as the
creator of the underlying work. Is that not enough?
Alex
PS: What if there were two or three "digital galleries" that published
digital replicas of famous works. Now imagine that one of those
galleries has staff dedicated to quality of reproduction, while another
is pretty much a "fly by night" operation, doing cheap reproductions for
the sole purpose of making a profit.
>From your experience, you've found that reproductions by the
quality-minded gallery are much more satisfying. Wouldn't you like to
add as a condition on your search, that you want digital images from the
quality shop, not the fly-by-night operation?
How would you do that?
--
Alex Satrapa
tSA Consulting Group Pty Ltd.
Canberra, Australia
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|