Photography as an object of investment

[Черномашенцев Владимир]

Сообщение от Posav

And I think that the author's signature on the photo just makes the photo author's work. Although it is still early photographer negatives could sell, give away, along with a photograph. And if everything in digital format and copy number can be without sacrificing quality, then buy the original seems like buying a wind.

I agree with you. Photo may have been exclusive in the 20 century, when you could buy with the rights of the original negatives. And then, the negatives can be copied.

In an age of digital photography problem kopirovniya removed. Exclusives no more, unless zaschaschat right buyer in court. Photos are now buying only glossy magazines, which can stand up for their rights. A private investor, especially in Russia, it is impossible to hope for honesty of the author or seller. I think buying the author's photo, is to treat it as a poster. And evaluate as the original poster: the format, the quality of the frame. We can not assume that the author of contemporary photography in a position to ask for their rights more money than the cost of copying copyrighted works of art? For example, Van Gogh and Kandinsky, Vermeer and Dali.

Added after 7 minutes

Сообщение от Galyona

I do not agree with you ...." real "photographer does not change ... and all these photographers - no ...

Talking about everything and anything.
I Cadets, that on this topic, many confuse the various activities, which can be used camera:

1) Photo
2) Computer Design
3) The performance
....

Even in pictures you can see a clear separation in directions which make different cameras and different lenses:

1) the shooting
2) Portrait
3) Macro
4) Nu
5) Landscape
....

Categorized can continue.

And you say: "real photographer". First, with terms to be defined.

Those who wish to talk about professional photography is better to go to the profile forums like forum.foto.ru