Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Contribute (And Use) Public Domain Images

Posted by timothy on from the royalty-free dept.

summetj writes "BurningWell.org is a repository for public domain ("free-for-any-use") images. If you need a high resolution digital image for any use, Browse the Images. If you have produced any high-resolution images that you are willing to place in the public domain, please Read the Donors FAQ."

7 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. We need more artists on board by bersl2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I find that most of the artists I have observed are very possessive about their works. They are afraid of people passing their works off as others'; they are afraid of people redistributing their for-pay collections.

    I wonder how (or even if) some of the FOSS ideals better translate. (In other words, what's the best approach to get more of this group to start using the Creative Commons?)

    1. Re:We need more artists on board by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "(In other words, what's the best approach to get more of this group to start using the Creative Commons?)"

      Texture images. A lot of 3D artists out there, including myself, bought a digital camera just for the sake of taking photos that become elements of textures for our final 3D work. Finding free textures on the web is a hassle, and most of us aren't so posessive of our texture images that we'd probably be likely to donate. At least, I can speak for myself. I'd be perfectly happy to share the photos I've taken if others would share theirs as well.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  2. Re:what was that thing.... by bcrowell · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Creative Commons licensing and public domain are two completely different things. They're mutually exclusive. If something is public domain, nobody has any rights over it, and therefore there's no way to impose a license on someone who wants to copy it.

    Generally in the free information world, there are two parallel communities, one doing PD (usually of stuff so old that there was no choice about making it PD) and one doing copyleft. For example, when it comes to books, Project Gutenberg and the Book People mailing list are on the PD side, while theassayer.org (see my sig) concentrates more on copylefted modern books. They're not redundant or competitive, they're complimentary.

    --
    Find free books.
  3. Other free photography/imagery sites by JeffHunt · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't forget http://www.sxc.hu and http://www.morguefile.com

    --

    "It was hell!" recalls former child.

  4. And exactly how do artists justify this? by human+bean · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Been there, done that, got what would have been the tee-shirt if it had paid enough to afford one.

    An artist lives off of selling their time in the form of their art. There is only so much of it per day, and an artist has to pick and choose what he/she is going to do, as there are always way more ideas than time.

    So, the question facing artists is thus: What can I do (that I do...) that will get me the ability to do more? Giving art away for free is not it. Even in the digital age, there is less time for imaging (or painting, etc) if I have to go out and earn bread to feed myself and keep the rent going.

    Solve this, and you will have more art than you can stand.

    --

    *whup* "Get along, little electrons. Heeyah!"

    1. Re:And exactly how do artists justify this? by bay43270 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But not all good photos come from people who make a living off art. I would imagine 1 or 2 good photos at a time from weekend hacks could make a significant contribution to a site like this. If the professional artist don't want to help... fine!

  5. Great idea... BUT by mabu · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Being a semi-professional photographer, I have tens of thousands of images that aren't being utilized that I would like to publish in a manner such as this. I don't mind putting images in the public domain, but I would like to receive credit or references where they're used. Most publishers would have no problem with this, and many photographers like myself would gladly donate quality images to the project in return for helping to establish our reputation.

    The problem I see with this site is that the images online appear to be anonymous. So what's to stop people from uploading copyrighted images or material they don't own the rights to? I can't see this project working if they can't documented some attribution for the content they're distributing.

    The site could try to hide under some sort of "common carrier" status, but ultimately, because there is no provinence attached to the content, no decent publisher would touch the images for fear of legal liability.

    The concept is nice, however, it's not practical in its current form. The system needs to be enhanced so that contributors can identify themselves and claim authorship of the content so they can verify the legitimacy of the licensing. This would also provide the motivation for higher-caliber artists to contribute, especially if they could choose from a finite list of licensing options, none of which necessarily requiring remuneration, but at the least, acknowledgement of the author of the content.