RE: extremely off topic

I have often wondered about images of people the National Geographic takes
of people who they do not pay any royalties to, yet make a profit from, and
own the image rights to. In your case, I think it is clearer since the
images are not of anyone recognisable and you may not be doing it for
profit.
 
An example that comes to mind, is the Sharbat Gula story. Here the
photographer wondered for years who the Girl in his photo was while National
Geographic Published it over and over.
 
I think in the end they gave her money for her story, and published a
followup article.
 
See:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/03/0311_020312_sharbat.html
 
Scott.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Ender100@aol.com [mailto:Ender100@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 5:40 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: extremely off topic

My daughter had an MRI of her skull/brain made into a t-shirt. I think she
wore it when she defended her doctoral thesis.... just to make sure they
would know she had a brain...

Mark Nelson

In a message dated 11/19/03 4:31:05 PM, preed@kumc.edu writes:

I am wanting to use some medical images, x-rays,
for some alt processes to put in a show. But I don't know anything
about the ethics of this.
The people in the x-rays will be in no way be recognizable and their
names will not be included.
The x-rays will be altered by me thru the process of making enlarged
negatives and being printed in cyano or something.
They will no longer be x-rays made by a radiologist but appropriated
and altered by me into something else, my own art.?
So does any one know of a reference resource of guidelines for using
medical images in art?
Received on Wed Nov 19 17:02:35 2003