Old images

Some works of art, photographs we find in attics, in the old cellars, trenches, in dilapidated buildings. Among them there are absolute masterpieces, very successful exclusive footage that could be forever lost. The author of these works, as a rule, is not known, but what to do? Do not disappear as good! I believe that the Saviour, who had raised such works from oblivion, has the full right to sell their licenses until't find the original author, and even in the case of detection of authorship he the right to remain co-owner of the work, as again breathed life into him, especially if it is old or damaged photos, incurred in the restoration of his hand. It is interesting to know your opinion on this subject.

© Noonie

Photo credits: Awcnz62, Cafebeanz Company, Dorvard, Susan Leggett.

Your article must be written in English

June 19, 2012


How did you digitize these photos? Did you scan the negatives?

June 16, 2012


Beautiful images in black and white!!!

June 15, 2012


My grandmother was an early photographer who developed and printed her own pictures on the farm. Most of these are images from just after the turn of the century. I am the sole descendant and owner of these images and have posted and sold many on Dreamstime. I inquired about this before I did so and was informed there were two requirements. 1) I had to submit a property release stating I am the legal owner of the images and 2) I had to submit a model release for the person(s) even though they are deceased. The ones I have up are all posted as commercial.[imgl]22785284

June 15, 2012


Wow, amazing images...

June 14, 2012


Digital Millennium Copyright Act: Only photos take prior to January 1923 lapse from copyright protection and enter the public domain.

June 14, 2012


It isn't really a matter of opinion, it's a matter of law. I would definitely do some research on copyright law before I attempted to sell images under this theory. Copyrights do eventually expire, but they run a long time. And, since I am not an attorney, I am going to stop here :-)

June 14, 2012


Simply making these editorial is not enough. That might take care of the model release requirement, but my understanding is that a property release is still required stating that you are the only heir and owner of these images.

June 14, 2012


I reckon I wouldn't feel comfortable uploading not my own work and as BCritchley has already mentioned - it's breaching the DT rules which say they must be your own work - but I don't want to throw stones here, because I have no idea how many rules I have broken in my past as photographer - but nearly never on purpose! :)

June 14, 2012


Should have added. I think it's quite OK to bring life to old images in this new medium.

June 14, 2012


All should be editorial. Four of the images are.

June 13, 2012


The fact that DT has these photos on the site is a proof that it is OK to post them

Not quite true. All the images shown except one are Editorial. The one that is not, it was uploaded several years ago when the rules were more lax. An Admin should change it to an editorial.

June 13, 2012


The fact that DT has these photos on the site is a proof that it is OK to post them. I don't think anybody believes that the second or third photo from this blog is original work of the photographer that has the account. Just like we do not pay royalties to Shakespeare whenever a play of his is played.

June 13, 2012


Very nice!

June 13, 2012


I'm pretty sure that if you did not take these nor own the copyright then you are breaching DT / copyright rules by uploading them on here. They are not yours to sell and you have accepted DT's terms and conditions when you submitted the shots. Finding, restoring old shots does not give us the authority to offer them for sale.

Related image searches
Photographs related image searches