December 2010
Art, ownership and dialogue
The amateurs of the work play a major role in the visual arts, either as ordering parties, either as buyers of works already completed by the artists. Many works would had never been created without art lovers. According to our understanding of ownership, it is simple: Someone has made the work possible and has paid for it. He will take it at home or in his museum.
For major works of art the question arise: how far is the public entitled to have access to the work. It is certainly true that some professionals must have at least temporary access to the work. What is about the public in the broadest sense, the Japanese and the Africans? Is it sufficient if an outstanding work is only accessible to experts, and possibly to people who do not live geographically too far? With the technology of today this problem can easily be resolved without debating about ownership.
Very detailed photographic reproductions in amazing color fidelity can now easily be produced and we can make them accessible to all-the-world through the Internet. Additional photographs of details in high resolution are also important. Why? For example, the impressionists want to capture the bright, sparkling and vibrant light. This can only be seen on a large scale, when the structure of the dye and the brush strokes are visible as undefined, harmonious, wild or dynamic. By three dimensional works, the surface and the patina are important because they show the material from which the work is composed, the traces of processing and the traces having arisen in the period after completion. Therefore, detailed views are also important for three dimensional works. Many of the works belong to the public. It makes no sense if they are stored in the museums basement, cool and dark in noble gas and nobody can see them.
Advantages and disadvantages of a presentation of artistic heritage in the Internet
If thieves can search for works on the Internet it is for them a advantage. But one can ask from serious buyers that they check the Internet before they buy works of unknown origin. Stolen goods should therefore be harder to sell. An owner who is afraid for his artistic piece and prefers to remain anonymous do not need to write on the Internet who he is and where his work is.
Who will be affected by the presence of works of art on the Internet?
Some people want to see the original work because they have seen pictures of it on the Internet. Others will stay at home because they already know works from the Internet and this is enough for them. The worst thing for a museum is, if a work is forgotten. The Internet can be helpful, so that this does not happen. If art is in good quality on the Internet, then lower sales of reproductions on the museums kiosk can result. But is the work in the museum for the museums kiosk or for the citizens and for the public?
The question remains: What about compensation for the still-living artist? If the work is resold the artist gets nothing. But it is good for the artist, if his work can be found on the Internet. It is helpful for his accessibility and reputation.