The Oxford Project
I recently had the privilege of assisting my old photography professor produce his own book of portraits, The Oxford Project. In 1985, Peter Feldstein took simple portraits of the entire population of Oxford, Iowa, opening a window into the lives of his neighbors. These are ordinary people, shopkeepers, postmen, farmers and housewives. Then he photographed them again, 20 years later. We look into the pairs of portraits and see the ravages of time reflected in their faces. We read their interviews and see they are a mirror of our own lives and losses.
This book would not have been possible without copyrights. Copyright allows the artist to reserve his right to sell his photographs in galleries, while licensing publication rights to a publishing house. The artist takes a huge risk, spending months preparing photographs. The publisher takes a huge risk in marketing a book with unknown prospects. Both of them may lose money.
The publisher distributed dozens of free preview copies to assess demand. Art scholars began interpreting his work in historical context, comparing his work to other portraitists. Gallery sales and exhibits of the photographs funded two years of expensive pre-production work by professional editors and designers. Positive reviews in major media encouraged the publisher to release it as a deluxe edition of 15,000 copies, a huge press run for an art book. The book is a smash hit, generating unexpected profits. The publisher expressed its gratitude by giving each portrait-sitter a free copy of the book (over $4000 worth of books) and threw a big party for the whole town. People are talking about giving this book to their grandchildren as an heirloom. The publisher has deposited the book in the Library of Congress and other book repositories. No doubt art historians will study this book in future centuries, to gain an insight into the human condition.
Joi Ito can wrap some media manifestos and portraits in the deluxe packaging of fine art book, in the belief his portrait sitters will purchase enough copies fund a larger edition, and that his work will be endlessly reproduced under a CC license. But unlike The Oxford Project, readers today and historians tomorrow will gain no insight into the human condition. They will merely wonder how anyone thought these awkward manifestos and amateur snapshots of self-appointed internet aristocrats were worth the paper they were printed on, let alone $395. ®
Charles Eicher is an artist and multimedia producer in the American Midwest. He has a special interest in intellectual property rights in the Arts and Humanities. He writes at the Disinfotainment weblog.
The Oxford Project
What's good about The Oxford Project isn't the photos, good as they are. It's the stories. Without the stories, they're just photos.
Mind you, most of the professional work under copyright is pretty shit snapshots, a couple of steps above the family album level.
Never heard of this Joi dude, but from what I've seen of the photos they're all pretty shit snapshots, a couple of steps above the family album level. Still, your article seems a bit whiny Mr. Eicher. Ok, all concerned apparently are just a little bit self-important and have their heads wedged up their collective arse to a greater or lesser degree, so what is it exactly you're complaining about?