Glass Discussion & Research. NO IDENTIFICATION REQUESTS here please. > Scandinavian Glass

The Studio Year Book 46 - Riihimaki, Ekenas, Holmegaard, etc

<< < (2/3) > >>

David555:
That is more than I credited the books for - still I think an original 1950s run could have over 150 pages of glass - of course there are articles as well to be considered from the original Studio Magazines

Ref lighting - lots of good lighting. I am going to stick to glass objects as it will take too long when I obtain a new volume to do glass & lighting

Here is one lighting page

http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/2276/lighting1yz.th.jpg

Thanks

Adam

nigel benson:
Hello everyone,

Hmm, I'm with Ivo on this. The Taschen volumes are more than adequate in place of the ability to own the original volumes.

I bought the whole set for use in the shop when they came out, since it was a cheap way of having pretty well all the information available in my run at home - as well as giving me access to the early ones that I don't have.

The adverts often repeat in the originals, so you mustn't assume that you would get a new one per advertiser per volume - nor even the same quantity per volume. That brings me to another point - don't assume there are the same number of pages on glass in each volume, because there most certainly aren't. The number of pages about glass are few in the early volumes and again in the late volumes and vary considerably in between.

I can't remember the date the Studio series started, but the last one was in 1980.

On balance, if you can't either find or afford the originals, the Taschen are a very reasonable alternative. You had a very lucky buy at £10, by todays prices Adam :)

Lastly, you really should consider the sense in encouraging others to break copyright laws and regulations Adam. If you want to that's one thing, but don't suggest others do. Just because a book is old it doesn't follow that nobody owns the copyright. It might be worth you checking with the publishers, Taschen, since they either got permission to reproduce them in their six volumes, or they own the copyright, or they checked it with their lawyers first. Copying pages onto the board, whilst useful, could bring this Board into disrepute :( - and I'm surprised that your suggestion was not edited, even if only to air on the side of caution :shock: .

Nigel

David555:
I have to disagree on some points Nigel

The Taschen books are in no way a substitute for the originals - the original year books as you will be aware (having owned a set) contain more images than the Taschen versions, I have many of the original magazines & bound 'Studio Magazine' volumes.

As to adverts I agree they do repeat, but I would not post these - their obvious interest is that they often give an importer name and address for glass manufacturers and designers - see Stennett-Willson topic above.

As to encouraging others to break copyright, I don't believe I am - but I have edited out any suggestion that people should collect or post images of these year books on this thread - I hope that is understood and also that no one should post any Taschen images — just in case - all my images are taken from an original 1950s publication.

The original publisher of this year book and the images posted was 'The Studio Publications: London & New York' - I checked this publisher out and it did indeed fold in the 1980s - all images fell into the public domain after 25 years - they have never been picked up or bought by Taschen, they would have to buy Studio Publications to own the back catalogue and that has and never will happen.

Taschen publish so cheaply because they use such free images - Studio publication images from this period on are used freely by many modern magazines and pattern books like Dover publications - the tag is not courtesy of Studio Publications/Taschen but in the bibliography as taken from The Studio ....'

I have done my home work on this as you always suggest Nigel

I have many magazines - such as 'The Magazine of Art' & 'The Artist' 1890s - 1950s with wonderful articles running to many pages on glass, I think it unfair not to be able to share these with GMB members.

I am very involved with copyright law, I am a designer and work with furniture/carpet/lighting companies who keep me constantly updated on the laws within Europe and Worldwide.

But to keep the peace, this is simply a post with some very interesting pictures I hope people will enjoy

I would ask that the committee don't pull this thread in light of my alterations and explanation here.

As always I bow to your wisdom and experience Nigel - even when we disagree on things, and those are very few :)  :)

I emailed Taschen about this years ago, but have sent another email today in case situation has changed (slim chance, but ....)

I would also like to put it that not being able to share Taschen images (which are not as good or big as the originals - IMHO original plates are best), then the year books images being in the public domain are an excellent substitute - if that is all they are then so be it.


Thanks


Adam P

David555:

--- Quote ---Dear Adam P********

There should be no problem with copyright - however, you should be aware that photographers can come out of the woodwork. Since publishing the "Decorative Art" series we have had nobody claiming copyright, so it should be okay - Studio Vista went bankrupt 20 odd years ago We titled the reprint "Decorative Art" rather than "Studio Yearbooks". Hope this is of help.

Best wishes,

Charlotte Fiell
--- End quote ---


Subject: Regarding "Decorative Art" Studio Yearbook copyright
Date: 03/02/2006 13:20:18 GMT Standard Time
From: email kept private
Reply To:  
To: my email as below
CC:  
BCC:

Thanks Charlotte - for getting back so quickly (and allowing me to post the reply)


Adam P

Della:
Well done Adam P.

Speaking as one who cannot afford or does not have the means to come by these sorts of photo's/information, I appreciate the trouble you have gone to.
I do understand the reservations and comments of other members on the board, but being totally legally illiterate, I cannot judge.
I can only say....Thank you.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page