The implications of cataloguing posthumous photographs in museums in the digital age

Full text

(1)THE IMPLICATIONS OF CATALOGUING POSTHUMOUS PHOTOGRAPHS IN MUSEUMS IN THE DIGITAL AGE. AS 3 (, 2,q \S. nAussT. A thesis submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University In partial fulfillment of The Requirements for The Degree. Master of Arts In Museum Studies. By Rebecca Lee Drudge San Francisco, California May, 2015.

(2) CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL. I certify that I have read The Implications o f Cataloguing Posthumous Photographs in Museums in the Digital Age by Rebecca Lee Drudge, and that in my opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree: Master of Arts in Museum Studies at San Francisco State University.. Professor of Museum Studies. A Victoria Lyall ( Professor of Museum Studies.

(3) THE IMPLICATIONS OF CATALOGUING POSTHUMOUS PHOTOGRAPHS IN MUSEUMS IN THE DIGITAL AGE. Rebecca Lee Drudge San Francisco, California 2015. Today the medium of photography is ubiquitous, and many museums are quickly expanding their fine art photography collections. How can museums steward their photographic collections and use them to engage a variety of audiences? This thesis uses a review of relevant literature and three case study institutions to explore the complex issues surrounding the management of fine art photographic collections in museums. The practice of posthumous photography is used as an entry-point to illuminate current museum policies and procedures. Key themes of authorship, reproducibility, and copyright are investigated, and conclusions and recommendations to the field are presented. As museums place more collections content online, the challenges of providing a balance between accessibility and prudent stewardship will only be more pressing.. I certify that the Abstract is a correct representation of the content of this thesis..

(4)

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS. TABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS...............................................................................................viii LIST OF IMAGES................................................................................................................... ix LIST OF APPENDICES...........................................................................................................x Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................. 1 The Organization of this Thesis............................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2: A Moving Target: The Evolving Medium of Photography and its Relationship with Museums............................................................................................................................7 Photography’s Technological Evolution and Dual Identity...................................................7 Reproducibility Versus Limited Supply: The Tension between Populist and Fine Art Photography............................................................................................................................. 11 Photography and the Art Market............................................................................................ 13 The Posthumous Printing of Photographs: the Case of Diane Arbus................................. 17 The History of Photographic Theory: Meditations on Reproducibility and Art................ 19 The Roles of Photography in Museums................................................................................ 24 Chapter 3: Museum Responsibilities, Accessioning, and Documentation........................ 31 Museum Responsibilities........................................................................................................31 The Acquisition Processes..................................................................................................... 32 Acquiring Photographs for Museum Collections.................................................................33 Copyright Issues for Museums.............................................................................................. 35.

(6) Managing Museum Databases and Images: CMSs and DAMSs........................................ 37 Metadata and Metadata Standards........................................................................................39 Using Controlled Vocabularies.............................................................................................. 43 Chapter 4: Museums, Audiences, and Accessibility............................................................ 46 What Museums Are and What They Do............................................................................... 46 Changing Audiences and Audience Development.............................................................. 48 Online Accessibility................................................................................................................ 50 The Accessibility and Opportunity of Museum Websites...................................................52 Managing Digital Images of Museum Collections.............................................................. 56 Chapter 5: Methodology.........................................................................................................59 Research Question.................................................................................................................. 59 An Overview of the Literature Review................................................................................. 60 The Case Study Selection Process.........................................................................................60 Interview Questions................................................................................................................ 63 Chapter 6: Museum of Contemporary Photography............................................................ 66 Museum Background..............................................................................................................66 Museum Collection and Public Programming......................................................................67 Museum Website and Online Collections............................................................................. 68 Recording Photographic Authorship......................................................................................70 Analysis of the Museum of Contemporary Photography.................................................... 72 Chapter 7: Center for Creative Photography........................................................................ 76 Institutional Background.........................................................................................................76 vi.

(7) Institutional Collection and Public Programming.................................................................77 Institutional Website and Online Collections.......................................................................79 Recording Photographic Authorship......................................................................................81 Analysis of the Center for Creative Photography.................................................................86 Chapter 8: International Center of Photography...................................................................90 Institutional Background.........................................................................................................90 Institutional Collection and Public Programming.................................................................91 Institutional Website and Online Collections.......................................................................92 Recording Photographic Authorship......................................................................................94 Analysis of the International Center of Photography.......................................................... 98 Chapter 9: Discussion........................................................................................................... 100 1. Diligence About Managing Issues Specific to Photography and Posthumous Prints. 100 2. Cultivating Meaningful Engagement with Audiences Across Multiple Platforms .... 104 3. The Relationship Between Photography and Museums is Important in the Digital Age ................................................................................................................................................. 107 Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 108 Chapter 10: Conclusions and Recommendations...............................................................110 Conclusions............................................................................................................................ 110 Recommendations to the Field............................................................................................. 112 Conclusion............................................................................................................................. 115 Works Cited. 117.

(8) LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS. AAM. American Alliance of Museums. AAMD. Association of Art Museum Directors. AIC. American Institute for Conservation. CCP. Center for Creative Photography. CDWA. Categories for the Descriptions of Works of Art. CMS. Content Management Systems. DAMS. Digital Asset Management Systems. FSA. Farm Security Administration. ICP. International Center of Photography. IPDA. International Print Dealers Association. IPTC. International Press Telecommunications Council. MoCP. Museum of Contemporary Photography. MoMA. Museum of Modem Art. PIR. Photographic Information Record. TMS. The Museum System. VRA. Visual Resource Association.

(9) LIST OF IMAGES. Image. Page. 1. The first photograph, by Joseph Nicephore N iepce.........................................................8 2. “Bald -headed old man, profile to the right; the father of Rembrandt” by Rembrandt Harmensz van R ijn ................................................................................................................. 20 3. Example of a caption that does not contain much information, created by author. 23. 4. Real caption Dorothea Lange caption to her photograph...............................................23 5. A screenshot of the definition of a “later print” in the Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus................................................................................................................................ 44 6. “The Milkmaid” by Johannes Vermeer, c.1660 ...............................................................58 7. Close up view of “The Milkmaid” by Johannes Vermeer, c. 1660 ............................... 58 8. The facade of the Museum of Contemporary Photography............................................67 9. The print study room of the Museum of Contemporary Photography...........................68 10. The fa?ade of the Center for Creative Photography..................................................... 77 11. View of the galleries at the Center for Creative Photography..................................... 79 12. A screenshot of the entry for the posthumous photograph “Police Station Lodgings” by Jacob Riis, printed by Alexander A lland........................................................................ 94.

(10)

(11)

(12) 2. and copyright. Posthumous photographic prints provide an excellent entry-point for examining issues of authorship, reproduction, artist’s intent, and copyright. In a 2014 New York Times article, “Looking at Photos the Master Never Saw,” critic Arthur Lubow describes two instances of posthumous photography currently garnering news in America: a Garry Winogrand retrospective exhibit, and the recent discovery of the work of Vivian Maier (Lubow, 2014). The work of both street photographers, Winogrand and Maier, has been printed from negatives that the photographer may or may not have viewed. Lubow asks of the reader, “If a photographer doesn’t engage with that image —doesn’t even select it—does it qualify as artistic expression?” (Lubow, 2014). Currently, these posthumous photographs are being exhibited in museums across the country and in museum online collections. How can museums address questions such as Lubow’s? To understand more about the challenges posthumous prints present, one must first examine the two traditions of photography: photography as a fine art and photography as a populist medium. Fine art photographs are part of an art historical tradition where uniqueness and scarcity is valued over reproducibility. The tradition of fine art photography uses the medium as a tool for artistic expression, just as painters use brushes, oils, and a canvas in painting. Since the late 20th century, fine art photography has been a rising part of the fine art market, and fine art photographs have become a commodity. Photographic artists often limit the number of times an image is reproduced, in a practice called “editioning,” so each print can maintain a high value in the market. The author, rarity, intent, and origin (or provenience) are all important facets in determining the aesthetic and monetary valuation of a work of photographic art. Currently, fine art photographers, gallerists, curators, and scholars are using specific terminology such as vintage, lifetime, and posthumous to describe the provenience, or origin, of a print. These photographic provenience terms are being used by museums to record information about the photographic fine art prints they accession. As fine art photography collections grow in museums across the country, museum staff.

(13) 3. must exercise great care in learning as much as possible about the objects they acquire, including posthumous prints. Key issues such as gathering accurate information, accurate cataloguing, awareness of copyright limitations, reproductions, and sensitivity to artist’s intent affect all museums and collections. The management of posthumous prints in museum collections highlights the challenges of responsible museum stewardship, especially the ethical responsibility to share accurate scholarship about collections. Professional organizations such as the American Alliance of Museums (AAM) offer standards and best practices pertaining to researching collections, cataloging collections, and making museum collections accessible. In addition to acquiring and presenting fine art photography, including posthumous prints, museums today also engage with photography as a populist medium. In contrast to the restricted nature of fine art prints, populist photography is inherently reproducible. Populist photography is used to record everyday occurrences and is primarily documentary in nature. Populist images are not valued for their rarity or uniqueness; rather, they are shared, reproduced, and disseminated freely to large audiences. Populist photography is an agent of democratization by spreading information quickly to increasingly larger audiences. This type of photography has never been more prevalent than it is in contemporary life. Populist photography has become a key part of nearly every aspect of life from news reporting to science to marketing to recreation and personal expression. Since the beginning of the medium, photography’s technological advances have increased its reproducibility and its accessibility to more and more people. Today, in the digital age, a photograph can be saved, sent, reformatted, manipulated, and shared with the click of a button. Currently, social media, the rise of portable digital cameras (particularly those on cell phones), and the internet have spread photography as a prevalent medium of interpersonal communication. In addition, populist photography has made visual information more accessible, including sharing images of museum collections..

(14) 4. Creating online collections on museum websites is a growing trend for museums across the country, and is fast becoming a primary way of engaging audiences. Most museums share relevant information about each collections object, as well as a digital image of object as well. These digital images are populist images, sharing information about the work to any visitor who has access to the internet. Presenting collections online can serve diverse audiences from the casual museum visitor to scholars. Collections websites often have many interactive features for casual visitors, allowing them to create their own curated groupings, share images, download images, comment on works, and tag works. When visitors are able to view and interact with images of the collection they are more likely to have a meaningful experience. The ability for casual visitors to experience objects online and to create and share their own meanings for objects is an exciting new frontier for museums. Online collections also offer valuable information to scholars. Digital images of collections have the ability to not only be surrogates for physical objects, they can also serve as a dossier of information about both the surrogate and the object. The editable metadata embedded into digital images can contain additional information about the museum object, copyright, the photographer, the institution of origin, and museum contact information. The descriptive metadata of a digital image is the 21st century equivalent of placing a wall label with the image. Utilizing the capabilities of metadata to embedded rich content information into digital images of collections creates sharable and searchable resources for scholars. Using national or international metadata standards, as well as controlled vocabularies, ensures maximum shareability. One of the limiting factors on the ability of museums to share online images of collections with both scholars and casual visitors is the restrictions of copyright. While museums are educational institutions, museum scholars are still exploring whether the doctrine of fair use extends to posting images on museum websites..

(15) 5. Through the lens of posthumous photography, this thesis will explore the issue of how to provide maximum accessibility while adhering to the highest standards of museum stewardship. Key themes of the nature of photography and fine art collections, standards for museum practice, and current models for audience engagement are explored. As museums utilize new technologies to engage audiences in the digital age, looking deeply at the theory behind the practice is important. This thesis is an endeavor to bridge the gap between current standards and new practices, and offers conclusions and recommendations to the field. The next section of this chapter will outline the organization of this thesis.. The Organization of this Thesis This thesis is divided into four sections: (1) the literature review; (2) the methodology; (3) the case study analysis; and (4) the discussion and conclusions. The first section of this thesis is a review of relevant literature, in chapters two through four. Specifically, chapter two reviews the history and theory of photographic authorship, and how authorship relates to museum practice. In chapter three, contemporary museum responsibilities, accessioning, and documentation are reviewed, especially in the area of photography and copyright. The fourth chapter of this thesis is a review of literature on museum audiences and accessibility. The second section of this thesis is chapter five, a description of the methodology of this research. The selection process for the literature review and selection of case studies is outlined in these chapters. The third section of this thesis is composed of chapters six, seven and with, which discuss the three case study institutions selected for this thesis: the Museum of Contemporary Photography, the Center for Creative Photography, and the Internationals Center of Photography. Information about the three case studies includes a review of relevant information about each institution, interviews with key museum personnel, and a comprehensive analysis of the institution’s practices..

(16) 6. The final section of this thesis a discussion and conclusions are presented. Chapter nine is a discussion of findings that synthesized the information from the literature review and case study results in chapters two through four and six through eight. Chapter ten consists of the conclusions of this thesis, and recommendations to the field are presented. It is time for museum professionals to start asking hard questions in regards to contemporary practices, photography, and the museum’s role in the digital age. Technology has made photography a ubiquitous and democratic medium, and the issue of posthumous prints, which can potentially be created without the artist’s input, hightlights the need to balance accessibility, artistic intent, technology, and copyright restrictions. The inherent reproducibility of photography since the innovation of the negative, and particularly since the creation of the digital image, has made photography accessible to an ever-increasing portion of the population. As accessibility to photography grows, photography continues to be perceived as both a reliable way of recording reality, and also as an expressive art form. Museums must grapple with the basic question of, “What is a photograph?” for the way a museum answers that question has several implications..

(17) 7. Chapter 2: A Moving Target: The Evolving Medium of Photography and its Relationship with Museums This chapter presents a brief history of photographic history and theory, and how museums began collecting photography. First, a brief discussion of the technological history of photography is presented. Second, this history of photography as a highly reproducible and populist medium is discussed. Third, photography’s connection to the fine art market is examined. Fourth, the practice of posthumous printing is examined through the example of works produced by Diane Arbus and her estate. Fifth, a short history of photographic theory is discussed. Finally, a concise history of photography and museums is presented. Together these elements of photography’s history are essential to understand photography as both a fine art medium as well as a populist medium of expression, and how photography impacts museum practice. Photography’s Technological Evolution and Dual Identity From the outset, the technological advances of the photographic process focused on reproducibility. Aperture and lens-based devices, such as the camera obscura, had been used for artistic and scientific pursuits for thousands of years; however, it wasn’t th. th. until the 18 and 19 centuries strides were made to permanently fix the images from cameras (Gustavson, 2012: 4-5). Joseph Niephore Niepce is credited with making the first photographic image, as we know it today, using a process called heliography, in the early 1820-1830s (see Image 1 on the next page) (Gustavson, 2012: 4). At the same time, Louis Jacques Mande Daguerre was tinkering with his own processes to fix photographic images to paper (Gustavson, 2012: 6). After briefly collaborating with Niepce, Daguerre created the daguerreotype process, the first commercially successful and widely used photographic printing process (Gustavson, 2012: 6-7). Many other processes and printing techniques would follow in the path of the daguerreotype, including a process developed by William Henry Fox Talbot..

(18) 8. The process Talbot created, the calotype, was very different than the daguerreotype. The daguerreotype process has no negative, and is a unique exposure on chemically treated copper (Gustavson, 2012: 6). The calotype, in contrast, process creates a positive print by the use of a negative (Gustavson, 2012: 21). First, a light sensitive piece of paper is. Image 1. The first photograph, by Joseph Nicephore Niepce. Image courtesy the Harry Ransom Center, University of Texas at Austin website.. placed within a camera and the image is exposed (Gustavson, 2012: 21). Second, a positive print is created by shining a light through the negative to expose a second piece of paper, which is the print (Gustavson, 2012: 21). Third, the print is developed and fixed to secure a permanent image (Gustavson, 2012: 21). The result of the calotype process is a permanent photographic negative and a permanent positive print. The use of a negative image to create a positive print became the standard format for producing photographic images after the development of the calotype because it made the image almost limitlessly reproducible. Talbot used paper for his early negatives, but new processes were developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries to use glass negatives and plastic film negatives. The technological evolution of photography takes place not only in changes in the medium of the negative, but also in advancements in the camera and printing technologies..

(19)

(20) 10. 4. the image is alterable through development, cropping, enlarging, toning, coloring, or other manipulations in both physical and digital media.. Over the nearly two hundred years since its inception, two traditions in the medium of photography have arisen: fine art photography and populist photography. Photography began as a populist medium, constantly evolving in technology and practice to become accessible to more and more people. Starting in the late 1800s, some photographers began to use photography to express themselves artistically, and argued for photography as a new fine art form. Currently, photography is accepted as a fine art, and as a populist medium. Because of the wide array of practices spanning both the fine art and populist traditions of photography, a considerable amount of terminology has arisen to describe types of photographic prints. Today, curators, scholars, auction houses, and gallerists describe fine art photographic prints by using terms that denote the provenience of the work. The provenience of an artwork is how an artwork originated, and describes who created a work, when it was created, and where it was created. Fine art photographic prints are described using the following categories: vintage, lifetime, or posthumous prints. To read definitions of these terms, please visit Appendix A, a glossary of photographic terms. This thesis focuses on how museums treat posthumous prints, those prints made after the death of a photographer. By examining this category of print, many of the challenges inherent in the medium are exposed. In the next section of this chapter, the source of the idea of a vintage versus posthumous print is discussed, as well as the role of the art market in dictating the course of fine art photography. Together with the art market, the four essential elements of photography listed above have shaped photography’s influence in society, the theory of photography, and its status as both an impartial record and as an artistic medium..

(21) 11. Reproducibility Versus Limited Supply: The Tension between Populist and Fine Art Photography The technology of photography has created a medium that has permeated many aspects of contemporary culture. Photography is used in journalism, in science, as official documentation, as art, as souvenirs, and as recreation. Genres of photography range from vernacular photography and snapshots, to landscapes, portraiture, collages, still-lifes, selfies, and photojournalism. Looking at contemporary culture, Michael Hand, in his 2012 book Ubiquitous Photography, writes: Over the last two decades digital images have become ubiquitous aspects of daily life in advanced capitalist societies... It is hard to imagine any aspect of contemporary life that has not become visual content, as communications and social relations are increasingly mediated through or accompanied by digital images (Hand, 2012: 1). Hand’s description of the reach of photography into nearly every aspect of daily life is the current manifestation of photography as a populist medium. Photography’s technological advances have helped photography to become accessible to nearly every individual, in America today. One of the largest advancements increasing photography’s impact on modern life is its transition from an analog to a digital medium. The introduction of photography into the digital age has revolutionized the use of the medium. Hand reflects that, "the digitization of photography has enabled the photographic image to become networked within a range of globally connected flows of information" (Hand, 2012: 11). The inclusion of digital cameras onto “smart” phones and other electronic devices has made photography a common mode of expression. The rise of the internet has helped to spread photographs as a form of communication between individuals through social media. Instagram, Twitter, Flickr, Pinterest, and Facebook are all examples of social media platforms that use photography as a main form of communication. As of April 18th, 2015, Instagram claims to have posted over 20 billion photographs by its over 200 million users since its inception in 2010 (Instagram, 2015)..

(22) 12. This level of populist participation in photography shows no sign of abating. Contemporary populist photographic images, such as those posted on Instagram, are defined by their accessibility and their reproducibility; populist images are created to be shared. In contrast, the other tradition of photography, fine art photography, emphasizes different aspects of the medium. The tradition of fine art photography began in the late 1800s. Photographers began to use photographs to express themselves artistically, and argued that the photographic print could be a work of fine art. A long and uphill battle between the art •. historical tradition and the budding forms of fine art photography ended by the mid 20. th. century when photographs became accepted as an artistic form by academics, museum professionals, artists, and by the market place. The practice of fine art photography draws on an art historical tradition of balancing elements of composition with the artistic message or intent of the image. The issue of an artist’s intent is important in fine art photography because it impacts not only how the work is categorized as art, but also how the work is reproduced, and under what conditions. Unlike populist photographers, fine art photographers and artists may have very specific intentions and processes for how their work is produced and presented. The artistic practice of photography begins when the artist composes the image within the frame of the camera and clicks the shutter. When shooting, artists are more intent on communicating artistic ideas or social commentary using the medium of photography, not simply using a photograph as a document of an event. Also, photographers who identify as artists may produce works in groupings called portfolios or series. These groupings are meant to be viewed together in a particular sequence. Photojournalists may produce similar groupings and call them photo essays. To view a work outside of its grouping may result in a lack of important context for the image and the artwork. Artists may also take great care in the production of a print to express their ideas, using extended techniques and manipulations to communicate their message..

(23) 13. Both populist and fine art photographers use the medium to express themselves and to understand the world around them. While a populist photographer may take a photo with their cell phone to record a trip to the beach, a fine art photographer may use an image of a beach as a metaphor for loneliness, or as a call to action for environmental protections. The goal of each photographer is different, and while both images may be shared, the fine art photographer may try to limit the supply of his or her image so as to be able to sell the image at a higher price in the fine art market. One of the main differences between the traditions of populist and fine art photography is the intent of the photographer and the inclusion of fine art photographs in the marketplace. Michael Hand believes that, "The rise of the photographic image during the twentieth century was inextricably tied to the growth of advertising and mass cultures of consumption" (Hand, 2012: 18). The next section of this chapter will explore the relationship between fine art photography and the art market, and how participating in the marketplace has defined and raised the profile of the medium. Photography and the Art Market Since the 1970s, fine art photography has become a growing segment of the art market (Gefter, 2014). Between 1854 and 1952, fine art auction houses began selling photographs in London, Europe, and the United States (Dixon, 2001). Long before photography started to be sold as a fine art commodity by auction houses, photography was sold in more popular formats such as salon portraits and travel postcards. Like most forms of collecting and art sales, the market of photography is interested in the uniqueness and rarity of an image. Like Michael Hand, Philip Gefter sees a connection between contemporary photography and consumerism, but also sees the art market as contributing to a rise in the prominence of photography. Gefter is an arts writer who often contributes to the New York Times on art auctions, the art market, and photography. Gefter comments on the rarity of a work having an impact on the value and ability to sell the work:.

(24) 14. [early in the history of photography] there was no market for photography, they never thought to make prints of their work in editions. Rarity increases the value of any print, both within the artist’s oeuvre and as an example of an outdated process (Gefter, 2009: 190). Gefter and others writers and theorists notice that the market of photography is responding to the economic theories of supply and demand: by limiting the amount of prints made of an image, prices for prints of the image remain high. Often, photographers will create editions of their works to limit the number of images produced from one negative. An edition in photography is the same as in other printed fine arts; when a work is printed in an edition, the artist agrees to print only a specific number of prints and no more, often destroying the plate or negative to ensure no further prints are made. A recent lawsuit demonstrates two larger themes of photography as a fine art commodity: the issue of reproducibility in the medium, and the idea of the necessity of a limited supply. In 2012 collector Jonathan Sobel sued artist William Eggleston for selling contemporary prints of works from his older oeuvre at a Christie’s auction (Grant, 2014a). The works in question were recently-printed large format digital prints of images that had been printed in a limited edition print process in the 1970s (Grant, 2014a). The new works were 60 x 44 inch digital prints, and the older series was 2 0 x 1 6 inch dyetransfer prints (Grant, 2014a). Sobel contended that Eggleston was undermining the value of the earlier works by printing new versions of the images, thus devaluing the works in Sobel’s collection (Grant, 2014a). The lawsuit against Eggleston was ultimately dismissed by the judge overseeing the case, who saw no conflict between a New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law that limits the reprinting of multiples and limited edition series, and Eggleston’s contemporary digital prints of the older images (Grant, 2014a). Whether one believes that Eggleston was justified in reprinting the photographs in a new medium depends on how one interprets the law, as well as how one conceives of the flexibility of artists to revisit their own work in a highly reproducible medium..

(25) 15. Another facet of the case is Sobel’s complaint that the new prints of the images devalued the original “vintage” series of prints he owned by increasing the limited the supply of the works by Eggleston. A vintage print is a print created by the artist or photographer near the time the negative was made. (Please see Appendix A for a more detailed description of editions and vintage prints.) This case begs the question: does a vintage print reflect a more valuable interpretation of an image than a work produced later? Are there different criteria for assessing aesthetic valuation versus monetary valuation? In the case of photographic prints, it seems that rarity and artist’s intent both play a role in the aesthetic and monetary values of a work. Several modern critics and art historians weigh in on the effects of the market on the way photography, editions, and reproducibility are perceived. Daniel Grant, an arts writer, notes in an article about vintage and posthumous printing that: The concept of a so-called “vintage print,” one created at or near the time the picture was taken, developed in the 1970s and is associated with the photographic dealer Harry Lunn, who sought to establish a basis for one print having a higher price than another. Prints made shortly after the image was taken presumably reflect a truer version of the photographer’s intention than on produced many years later, and generally carry a significant premium (Grant, 2014b). Jerry Thompson, a photographic theorist, mirrors Grant’s assertion that the rise of limited editions and the preference for vintage prints are market-related: Since about 1975, a high-dollar market for photography existed. In it, the rules of the old market for works of art apply: color sells for more than black and white; larger costs more than smaller; rarer brings a better price. So talented photographers began to work in color, make large prints, and print in limited, numbered editions (Thompson, 2013: 23). Furthermore, a 2001 article from The Economist notes that: Photography should be the perfect democracy. From a single negative hundreds of prints can be made, all identical if need be, and, in theory, of equal value. But in the refined world of vintage photography, a Man Ray image, say, soars at least ten-fold if the master printed the negative himself (The Economist, 2001)..

(26) 16. These authors, Gefter, Grant, Thompson, and The Economist, all surmise that the contemporary attention paid to reproductions, editions, copies, and series of photographic works may be a recent phenomenon. It is clear that as photography has become a fine art medium, standard market forces such as limited supply and rarity have influenced how photography is valued. Indeed, since the 1970s, some fine art photographers have begun to limit editions of their work in order to be able to command higher prices for their prints. In addition, the provenience of how photographic prints are created is playing a role in the aesthetic and monetary valuations of a work. Galleries, curators, and appraisers pay special attention to whether a print is a vintage print, a lifetime print, or a posthumous print. Whether a print is a vintage versus contemporary print or not may impact how the print is valued, as in the case of Eggleston’s lawsuit. Whether a print is a lifetime print or a posthumous print may also impact how the print is value, as in the case of Man Ray, cited by The Economist. Many questions arise from these systems of valuation based on the provenience of a print including: •. Are vintage prints more representative of a photographer’s intent than a new printing made at a later point in a photographer’s career?. •. Is there any problem with artists or photographers themselves reprinting, or reimagining older works in new media or in new interpretations of their own work?. •. Are vintage or lifetime prints more valuable or representative of the photographer’s intent than prints made by another printer, or made posthumously?. The answers to these questions depend heavily on whom you ask, and on the photographer in question. While the concern over the provenience of a work may be a modern concern, there is no indication that the market is shifting away from this standard of valuation. Then next section of this chapter will explore the impact of the importance of provenience and artist’s intent by exploring the lifetime and posthumous fine art photographs of Diane Arbus..

(27) 17. The Posthumous Printing of Photographs: the Case of Diane Arbus When considering the differences between lifetime and posthumous prints, it can be hard to determine if the posthumous print is consistent with the artist’s intent for his or her work. The issue of artist’s intent is important both to the art market for fine art photographs as well as to museums, who strive to fully understand the photographs they are collecting. Records from the artists, such as annotated artist proofs or contact sheets, are important in determining the artist’s intent for a particular image or series. Artists often manipulate, crop, or otherwise alter both prints and negatives before a final product has been created. Scholars, curators, and gallerists may all have differing opinions on what photographers may have intended for negatives that have been left undeveloped or unprinted after the artist has passed away. In some cases, the artist’s estate may retain control of the copyright and ownership of images or negatives left by the artist. Some estates holding copyright choose to approve new prints to be made posthumously. One contemporary example of is the estate and work of fine art photographer Diane Arbus. Diane Arbus was a photographer interested in documenting marginalized communities, and died in 1972 (DeCarlo, 2004). After her death, her estate authorized new prints to be made from her negatives (Grant, 2005). Arbus did not edition her work during her lifetime, but some of her work is printed posthumously in editions of seventyfive and are labeled with the date it was printed and the name of the printer (Grant, 2005). The printer is Arbus’ longtime assistant, Neil Selkirk, who printed Arbus’ work posthumously from 1972 until 2003 (Grant, 2005). When posthumous prints are made of an artist or photographer’s work, this can have an impact on the market for the work and its ability to be accessioned into museum collections. In an article about Arbus’ work and the posthumous prints of her work, Grant notes:.

(28) 18. ‘There are far more posthumous than lifetime prints for Arbus,’ said Frish Brandt, executive director of San Francisco’s Fraenkel Gallery, which sold Arbus prints for more than 30 years ... The price difference between those created during Arbus’ lifetime and those printed by Selkirk is significant, Brandt noted, with lifetime images starting at $25,000 and extending to “the mid six figures, and some have gone for over $1 million,’ while those produced by Selkirk fall in the $5,500-$100,000 range (Grant, 2014b). In addition to Grant’s comments, Philip Gefter also comments on how the art market assesses Arbus’ works: The prices of Arbus prints vary. Dealers and astute collectors will focus on the significance of the image in context of her oeuvre; the vintage, whether it was printed by her or not; the print’s provenance and its rarity, that is, how many were made from the negative and whether Arbus signed them... then there is the condition of the print... even the paper the image is printed on (Gefter, 2009: 198). The case of Arbus’ posthumous editions is notable, for Arbus did not make editions during her lifetime, and it was only after her death that her inventory was created, new works were made by her estate, and the posthumous works were limited to specific editions. As we can see from the Eggleston lawsuit and commentary about price differences between lifetime and posthumous works by Arbus, the market influences how photography is valued in terms of who printed a work and when. More value is placed on lifetime or vintage works because they may more accurately represent artist intent and also because they are more rare. To increase rarity in a medium defined by its almost limitless reproducibility, photographers, artists, and estates create limited editions of works. Art critic Arthur Lubow is critical of posthumous printing in his article “Looking at Photos the Masters Never Saw” (Lubow, 2014). Lubow states: “The posthumous intervention can undermine confidence that any photograph truly depicts an artist’s sensibility” (Lubow, 2014). There is a tension between the desire to have more access and sales of posthumous prints, and an anxiety that something is lost when the hand of the artist is missing..

(29) 19. A positive outcome of the practice of posthumous printing provides more access to an artist’s oeuvre. A negative outcome of posthumous printing is that an artist’s intent may not be accurately represented, and that the monetary or perceived value of other prints of the same image may be impacted. Some museums may not collect posthumous photographic prints, but it depends heavily on the provenance and provenience of the print in question, as well as the artist or photographer. In addition, some museums may create posthumous prints of some photographers or artists, especially works by anonymous photographers, historic and non-artistic images, and works that are in the public domain. Photography theorist Jerry Thompson, in his book Why Photography Matters, (2014), commented that, "Our popular art criticism extols the original; our art markets place a higher price on the unique" (Thompson, 2013: 44). While criticism of photography may praise the original and collectors may praise the unique, it is photographic theorists and philosophers that are concerned with the authentic. Writers such as Walter Benjamin, Roland Barthes, Jean Baudrillard, and George Batchen all have weighty opinions about photography, its identity artistic medium, its inherent reproducibility, and its effects on modern culture both inside of and apart from the market. The next section of this chapter will explore these ideas. The History of Photographic Theory: Meditations on Reproducibility and Art Since the beginning of the photographic medium many scholars, philosophers, and critics have wrestled with two key facets of the medium: photography’s ability to be endlessly replicated and its relationship to art. In the following pages, the theories of several key theorists will be discussed, starting with Walter Benjamin. Walter Benjamin’s A Work o f Art in the Age o f Mechanical Reproduction stands as a seminal work of photographic theory. Published in 1936, this essay critiques photography’s impact on the way the viewer engages with art and the idea of “authenticity.” In his essay Benjamin describes the impact of modes of reproduction, such as printing, photography, or film, on.

(30) 20. the aesthetic appreciation of art. Although there have always been replicas in art, Benjamin believes that mechanical reproduction “represents something new” (Benjamin, 1968:220). A key argument in Benjamin’s essay is the difference between a work of art and its reproduction. Benjamin introduces the idea of an artwork’s “authenticity” by stating, “even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be” (Benjamin, 1968: 222). For Benjamin, a work of art is unique for its history, through its provenance, provenience, and for its physical changes over time (Benjamin, 1968: 222); therefore, the authenticity of a work of art is compromised by mechanical reproduction (Benjamin, 1968: 222). Mechanical reproduction can do two key things to “degrade” the authority of an authentic work of art, according to Benjamin: 1. mechanical reproduction can reveal elements of the original that are unseen to the naked eye; and 2. mechanical reproductions can put the work of art into contexts that the authentic original would never have been able to go (Benjamin, 1968: 222-223). To Benjamin, the original Rembrandt etching in Image 2 has suffered a loss of aura and its authenticity is tarnished by the mechanical reproduction manifest in the photograph of the work we see on this page. The crux of Benjamin’s argument of the reproduction “degrading” the original. image 2. “[Bald -headed old man, profile to the right; the father of Rembrandt]” by Rembrandt Harmensz van Rijn. Courtesy of the Rikjsmuseum website..

(31) 21. work of art is that reproductions jeopardize the “historical testimony” of the object, and affect the work’s authority, which he terms the work’s “aura” (Benjamin, 1968: 223). The “unique existence” of the work of art is sacrificed for a “plurality of copies” (Benjamin, 1968: 223). All of these elements contribute to a “tremendous shattering of tradition” for Benjamin (Benjamin, 1968: 223). Benjamin’s idea of the “contemporary decay of the aura” is brought about by “the masses” wanting to bring things “closer,” as well as the desire to “overcom[e] the uniqueness of every reality by accepting its reproduction” (Benjamin, 1968: 225). Later in his essay, Benjamin goes on to state that, “From a photographic negative, for example, one can make any number of prints; to ask for the ‘authentic’ print makes no sense” (Benjamin, 1968: 226). This assessment of the medium directly contradicts trends discussed earlier in the chapter about the rise of fine art photography, and the market value of fine art photography. Today prints are viewed as “unique” and “authentic” because each print has its own provenance and provenience. In addition, Benjamin did not view photography as artistic or expressive; rather, his view of photography is based on the populist tradition of photography where reproducibility, not aura, is valued. In contrast to Benjamin’s appraisal of the role of authenticity and aura as defining art from photography, philosopher Roland Barthes the artistic and existential aspects of photography. Roland Barthes was an aesthetic philosopher and semantic theorist. In Camera Lucida, one of his last publications, Barthes outlines his goal for the book by writing, “I wanted to learn at all costs what Photography was ‘in itself;”’ however, as Barthes admits to his reader, understanding the true nature of photography “evades us” (Barthes, 2010:4). To Barthes, it is hard to define what a photograph is at its essence without reacting to the content it has captured: “In short, the referent adheres. And this singular adherence makes it very difficult to focus on Photography” (Barthes, 2010: 6). Throughout the book, Barthes applies his semantic theories to the practice of photography, including the idea of the “referent.” The referent is the real object or reality.

(32) 22. that photography refers to in its image. Barthes describes how our understanding of reality and photography is shaped by signs and their referents, which distance us from directly experiencing or describing reality. The idea of photography as “a superimposition...: of reality and of the past” is important to Barthes (Barthes, 2010: 76). Because photography captures a distinct moment of the “emanation of the referent,” or the fact that the photographic process captures light reflecting off of a subject, Barthes is struck by the fact that photography is unable to be as coded as other forms of communication (Barthes, 2010: 80). Barthes states: The important thing is that the photograph possesses an evidential force, and that its testimony bears not on the object but on time. From a phenomenological viewpoint, in the Photograph, the power of authentication exceeds the power of representation (Barthes, 2010: 88-89). Unlike Benjamin, Barthes is not bothered by photography’s endless reproducibility, and does not view the medium as being destructive to its subjects. Barthes believes photographs are unique and authentic because they record discreet passages of time, or of parts of reality as they pass. The endless reproducibility of the print, or its populist uses, do not threaten Barthes’ conception of art. Barthes believes photography possesses qualities borrowing both from art and documentary pursuits, and regards photography as an almost magical and elusive process that captures reality in a unique language. Jean Baudrillard, a contemporary philosopher, is less concerned with Barthes’ ideas of the indexical and “evidential force” of photography, and is more interested in how there is no reality left for photography to refer to. Baudrillard’s essays often include meditations on photography, digital media, virtual reality, and his idea that we currently reside in a “hyperreality.” In his essay “Objects, Images, and the Possibilities of Aesthetic Illusion,” Baudrillard states: An image is an abstraction of the world in two dimensions. It takes away a dimension from the real world, and by this very fact the image inaugurates the.

(33) 23. power of illusion... [virtual reality] abolished the game of illusion by the perfection of the reproduction, in the virtual rendition of the real. And so we witness the extermination of the real by its double (Baudrillard, 1997: 9). As this passage describes, Baudrillard believes that contemporary society exists in “the age of simulation,” a hyperreal state that never interacts with a true reality (Baudrillard, 2001: 170). Baudrillard’s assessment of contemporary life and photography is that digital images bolster a state of virtual reality by the perfection of their reproduction. Baudrillard is taking the inquiry of the relationship of photography as a populist or artistic medium a step farther than Benjamin and Barthes gently questioning of how to assess “the real” or the “authentic” in a digital age; Benjamin is suggesting there is no longer a “real” reality to refer to. In Image 3 and Image 4, the same photograph has been given two captions: one fabricated by the author and another created by the photographer at the time the image was taken. Baudrillard would argue that in our contemporary hyperreality,. Image 3. An example of a caption that does not contain much information, created by author: “Image by unknown photographer, 1940s, view of storefront and car. Image courtesy of the Library of Congress.”. Image 4. The original caption to this photograph by the photographer, Dorothea Lange: “Oakland, Calif., Mar. 1942. A large sign reading "I am an American" placed in the window of a store, at 13th and Franklin streets, on December 8, the day after Pearl Harbor. The store was closed following orders to persons of Japanese descent to evacuate from certain West Coast areas. The owner, a University of California graduate, will be housed with hundreds of evacuees in War Relocation Authority centers for the duration of the war.” Image courtesy of the Library of Congress..

(34) 24. neither caption or image is more “true” than the other. Interestingly, Baudrillard does not discuss photography’s relationship with art, or as an artistic medium, but is more concerned with the idea of the medium creating a false sense of reality. The tradition of anxiety over reality, reproduction, and photography is very present in Baudrillard’s philosophy. The three theorists, Benjamin, Barthes, and Baudrillard, all have contributed to a rich discussion about the nature of photography. Main themes emerging through their writings are photography’s relationship to reality, photography’s nature as a reproducible medium, and whether photography has an artistic element or destroys art that it captures. In addition to the contributions of the previously mentioned philosophers, museums have had a role in shaping how photography was perceived, and the interaction between museums and photography has brought change to both. The history of photography as both a fine art and as a populist medium has an interconnected history with museums, which directly impacts current museum practices, ethics, and standards. The Roles of Photography in Museums The two traditions of photography, as a fine art and as a populist medium, have different roles in modem museums. As a fine art, museums collect photographs as objects accessioned into their collection: to be studied, presented, and published as artworks. As a populist medium, museums use photography to record of a work in the collection, as an archival material, as promotional material for marketing the museum, and as interpretive elements of an exhibition. The remainder of this chapter will discuss the role of photography in museums in both of these traditions, starting with photography as a fine art. Around the turn of the century, a great debate between artists, critics, and art historians raged as to whether photography could be considered an art form. Photographers and critics, such as Alfred Stieglitz, argued for the inclusion of photography as a fine art both in the art market, in academia, and in museums. Private.

(35) 25. expositions, salons, and galleries focused on presenting photography as a fine art, and more photographers began to use art-historical techniques and traditions in their photographic works. In 1937 Beaumont Newhall, an art historian and history of photography historian at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) curated the Photography 1839-1937 exhibition (Museum of Modem Art, 1993). This exhibition was the first comprehensive art historical treatment of the history of photography in a American museum, and was the dawning of a new era for photographs to be collected and presented by museums both as a document and as a fine art (Walch and Barrow, 1986: 69). Before the Photography 1839-1937, American museums had not fully explored the history of photography, let alone in an art historical context. After the MoMA exhibition, museums began expanding their view of photography, and began to rampantly collect and exhibit the medium. Interestingly, the acceptance of photography as a fine art in museums was predated by its acceptance as a populist and documentary medium. Photography first entered museums in the mid-19th century as a populist medium. One of the first museums to start a photographic collection was the Victoria and Albert Museum, in the United Kingdom, in 1852 (Victoria and Albert Museum, 2015). In the United States several exhibitions, galleries and salons began displaying photography in the San Francisco Bay Area and in New York City in the late 1800s. These venues presented mainly populist photography. The first museums to exhibit photography used it as a medium to documents works of art and architecture, not as an object of study in and of themselves. In San Francisco, California, the de Young museum acquired photographs documenting the 1895 California Midwinter International Exhibition shortly after the exhibition ended, beginning its photographic collection (de Young Museum, 2015). Similarly, in New York the Museum of Modern Art acquired photography shortly after it opened in 1929, and it also used photographs as interpretation and as records of other works of art for its architecture and art exhibitions from 1929 to 1937 (Goodyear, 1943:.

(36) 26. 64). Slowly, other museums began to add photographs to their collections, mainly in the populist tradition. As noted in an earlier in this chapter, theorist Walter Benjamin did not believe a photograph could attain the status of an artwork, nor that it should be used to document artworks in other media. Contrary to Benjamin’s arguments, in his 1953 essay, "New Reports and New Visions: The Nineteenth Century," William Irvins traces the development of how photography positively changed the appreciation of art by both academics and the layperson. Irvins argues that, "the photograph in its way did as much for the study of art as the microscope had for the study of biology" (Irvins, 1953: 216217). Irvins claims photography revolutionized how we perceive the genres of portraiture, landscapes, news, recording documents, and works of art (Irvins, 1953: 217). Irvins describes the ability of photography to take an image of a work with detailed information of surfaces as being a new tool for the appreciation of art: “The magic of the work of art resides in the way its surface has been handled, just as the magic of a poem lies in the choice and arrangement of its words” (Irvins, 1953: 224). According to Irvins, scholars and the general public were no longer satisfied with etching or lithographic reproductions of works. Irvins believes that the dispersal of photographs of artworks was instrumental for democratizing art appreciation, and made possible a more accurate environment for art criticism by, "emancipat[ing] an important group of people from the traditional and academic points of view" (Irvins, 1953: 227). Irvins is suggesting that because photography can be used as a populist medium to record works of art, it is democratizing and giving access to works of art to viewers who would not otherwise be able to view and appreciate it. As the popularity of photography grew, its presence in the museum field grew as well. In the 1940s, the George Eastman House opened in Rochester, New York. The George Eastman House is a repository and museum for George Eastman’s photographic collections as well as innovations and photographic technology produced by the Eastman-Kodak Company (George Eastman House, 2015). The George Eastman House.

(37) 27. was the first institution devoted specifically to preserving and exhibiting the medium of photography in the United States. The George Eastman House’s collection focuses on historic processes and collecting vintage and historic photography. Since the 1950s, the amount of photography in museums has grown. Many art museums have established photography departments and expanded their fine art photography collections. On the other end of the spectrum, nearly every museum in the United States, including art museums, collects populist photography to record and illustrate other artworks, objects, architecture, events, or people. Museums create populist photographs to document their collection objects, to use as interpretation for exhibits, and to use as marketing material for the museum. On the whole, photography has become as pervasive in museums as it has in contemporary culture at large. Currently, the American Alliance of Museums lists four photography-specific museums as accredited, and the International Center of Photography lists over thirty museums and institutions with major collections of photography around the United States (American Alliance of Museums, 2015a; International Center of Photography, 2015c). Contemporary museum professional and art historian Peter Walsh states, “The effects of photography on art and culture have been enormously complex and are still incompletely understood” (Walsh, 2010: 20). Walsh’s essay, “The Rise and Fall of the Post Photographic Museum: Technology and the Transformation of Art” (2010) explores the relationship between photography and museums. Walsh claims, like Michael Hand, that photography had an immediate and sweeping impact on society: Within a generation of its invention, photography had become the leading avenue for distributing images - overwhelming, in quantity and breadth of distribution, all images made in the history of humanity (Walsh, 2010: 23). Consequently, Walsh contends that, “photography helped give rise to an entirely new kind of art museum, the post-photographic museum” (Walsh, 2010: 23). Walsh posits that pre-photographic museums were “princely collections” and “were not intended to represent art as a whole” (Walsh, 2010: 24). Walsh believes that the post-photographic.

(38) 28. museum has three main qualities: (1) it “set[s] out to capture everything”; (2) it is “founded to create a collection” not to house a pre-existing collection of a wealthy patron; and (3) the primary function of the museum is to educate (Walsh, 2010: 24). Walsh gives the example of the South Kensington Museum as a post photographic museum. The South Kensington Museum was founded with an educational mission, it actively acquired casts and photographs of works of art to display, and it was less concerned with acquiring the original work of art (Walsh, 2010: 25). The South Kensington Museum used photographs not only in its exhibits, it also used them as tool for the acquisition process, sending its photographer into the field to shoot potential acquisition collections then bringing back the prints instead of the objects (Walsh, 2010: 25). Another important idea posited by Walsh is that the abundance of photographic reproductions of objects made the original work of art more important (Walsh, 2010: 28). This idea directly contradicts the prevalent anxiety of Benjamin and Baudrillard that reproduction is harmful or diminishing to a work or art or a subject. Walsh argues that academic art history began to use photography as the primary media through which art is “understood, interpreted and evaluated” (Walsh, 2010: 28). Walsh is critical of Walter Benjamin’s opinion that the reproduction devalues the original work of art and its aura (Walsh, 2010: 29). Instead, Walsh believes “it is the mechanical reproduction —the photograph —that created the aura of the original” (Walsh, 2010: 29). In fact, Walsh argues that “the more reproduced an artwork is —and the more mechanical and impersonal the reproductions —the more important the original becomes” (Walsh, 2010: 29). Indeed, Walsh believes photography has such an impact on the perception of a work of art in contemporary times, that he writes: Conversely, less reproduced art is less significant. The unphotographed, unpublished work of art exists in a kind of limbo. In fact, under the aura of the post-photographic museum, the unphotographed work can hardly be said to exist.

(39) 29. at all. In post-photographic art history, discovering and publishing such a work is almost a second act of creation (Walsh, 2010: 30). Walsh’s ideas about photography elevating the importance of an artwork are of particular importance in the digital age. Today, as museums are creating new platforms for engaging their audiences online, photography is plays a key role. Museums utilize photography to capture images of their collections and to exhibit those surrogate images online in online exhibits and searchable collections databases. Museums also use photographs to illustrate physical installations of exhibits at the museum, and to convey interpretive or promotional content for museum events and programming. Indeed, Walsh’s critique of the unimportance of the un-photographed object would seem to be confirmed in the age of the museum website - if an object in the collection is not present online, it may not be perceived to be as valuable or interesting as a work with a complete profile and digital image. The existence of online collections databases gives museums a perception of transparency, but older underlying perceptions about the authority of museums still exist in the digital age: if the museum doesn’t present something, it’s not as important as what is on view. Interestingly, museums are using photographs to deconstruct the omnipresent idea of the museum as a disembodied voice of authority. Museums are now using social media, such as Instagram, Pinterest, Facebook, and Twitter, to promote audience generated content about the museums and in collections. Often, this crowd-sourced content is in the in the form of photography, whether in the form of selfies, scavenger hunts, or other interactive games or challenges. The technological advances of digital photography, especially on smartphones, makes photography a new platform for engagement with audiences in the museum (taking selfies), and with online audiences (online collections). As a pervasive “ubiquitous” medium, photograph is becoming more and more important to museums and their engagement with audiences. In addition, museum.

(40) 30. collections of photography, whether vintage, lifetime, or posthumous prints, continue to grow, just as the market for art photography grows as well. Walsh’s comments reflect the growing trend of the use of photography to document museum collections, and their increasing digitization and presentation online. Critics and scholars such as Irvins, Berger, and Walsh all represent pieces of an ongoing critical dialog about the role of photography in terms of its identity as fine art, and as document of art. Reviewing the history of photography, the history of its theory, and the history of its involvement in museums, it can be concluded that: the accessibility and reproducibility of photography have democratized the medium and the flow of information. In the next chapter of this thesis, the mechanics of how museums collect and present photography, including posthumous prints, is discussed..

(41) 31. Chapter 3: Museum Responsibilities, Accessioning, and Documentation In the previous chapter photography’s technological history, its theoretical history, and its history in museums was discussed. This chapter will explore how museums today collect fine art photography, and what special concerns a museum must manage when preserving, acquiring, and presenting photographic collections. First, contemporary standards of museum ethics will be discussed. Second, a brief outline of the best practices for accessioning and building museum collections will be reviewed. Third, a discussion of copyright and how it affects museum practice will be presented. Fourth, an overview of the presentation of recording collections information in the digital age will be discussed. Many of the issues presented in this chapter apply not only to photographic collections, but to museum collections generally. Museum Responsibilities Museums are unique institutions in the landscape of American nonprofits. While museums are structured similarly to other non-profits, and often have similar educational and social aims, what makes museum unique is their imperative to ethically steward their collections in the public trust for perpetuity. To embrace this task is no small feat. Museums have the ethical responsibility to maintain best practices and standards for each and every single item in their collections. The American Alliance of Museums (AAM) is a leading professional organization for American Museums. The AAM creates and disseminates best practices and standards for the field, including museum ethical responsibilities. The 2015 Trendswatch, an annual publication by the AAM, lists “ethical everything: managing the moral marketplace” as one of the top six trends of the year (American Alliance of Museums, 2015e). More specifically, the Trendswatch informs readers, “our heightened sense of ethics is driven in part by emerging technologies” and that museums should:.

(42) 32. .. .review and revise ethics statements to address emerging issues. Traditional areas of concern like conflict-of-interest and provenance research may need to be expanded to include sections on internships, privacy of digital data and the ethical provenance of art displayed in the museum (American Alliance of Museums, 2015e). As demonstrated in the brief list of issues in the Trendswatch, museum ethics touch every aspect of museum practice. Museums rely on maintaining a high ethical bar to uphold the public’s trust. According to research from Indiana University, museums are one of the “most trustworthy” institutions in America (American Alliance of Museums, 2015d). The responsibility to maintain the perception of trustworthiness extends to every aspect of museum practice and management starts at the time of acquisition. The Acquisition Processes Museums gain new collections by formally “accessioning” work. In the essential tome A Legal Primer fo r Managing Museum Collections authors Marie Malaro and Ildiko DeAngelis defines acquisition as, “the formal process used to accept and record an item as a collection object” in her book A Legal Primer to Managing Museum Collections (Malaro and DeAngelis, 2012: 59). Acquisitions are usually the result of a long process of vetting many aspects about an object: the significance of the object, how it will be of value to the institution, whether it fills a gap in the collection, its provenance, its condition, a valuation made of the work for insurance purposes, and the completeness and quality of its title (Malaro and DeAngelis, 2012: 64). Curators and registrars are often the staff members of a museum who pursue the answers to those questions, and document their findings. Proposed acquisitions are usually presented to an acquisition committee at the museum. Acquisition committees can be comprised of museum staff, board members, or advisory council members. Museums officially acquire objects when there has been a deed of gift transferring the title of the work to the institution. Most museums require receipts of the physical.

(43) 33. transfer of the object, as well as any past documentation about provenance, conservation, specific issues, installation notes, previous sales receipts, past exhibition history, and any other relevant information about the object. Museum collections management policies, created by staff and approved by the board of the museum, guide museum staff in how to acquire objects for the collections using best practices and museum-field standards. According to Rebecca Buck and Jean Allman Gilmore in their publication, Museum Registration Methods 5: The purpose of the collections management policy is to minimize risk to the collections... The core policies of acquisition, loan, deaccession, access, and collections care are augmented by ethics policies, emergency preparedness policies, and collecting plans framed by the mission and scope of collections (Buck and Gilmore, 2011: 24). Buck and Gilmore also remind the reader that, “The access and use policy must balance the requirements for collections care and security with the museum’s public trust responsibilities” (Buck and Gilmore, 2011: 28). This global idea, that the museum must thoughtfully balance access with security and preservation needs, relates to nearly every aspect of collections management and registration. Another important idea in collections management is that intellectual control over a work should begin with the acquisition, and the acquisition of photography is no exception. Acquiring Photographs for Museum Collections When acquiring fine art and populist photographic collections for museum collections, the American Institute for Conservation (AIC) recommends a questionnaire called the Photograph Information Record (PIR) for donors and/or registrars to use to create a comprehensive record of the work. The Photograph Information Record was developed by many museum professionals over the course of several years, and the most recent version was revised in 2009 (American Institute for Conservation, 2015). (The website of the American Institute for Conservation lists that at least seventeen institutions.

No results found