My initial comment was not concerning law and "right of expression", but a plea for roadside foamers and photographers to consider monetarily supporting (in some manner) those who make their hobby plausible. If they all retain your point of view, your pictures ARE all we will have. Two-dimensional on print paper or screen, no "art" is as impressive as the real thing. Concede to me that it would be a nice jesture a to donate a few bucks to the Grand Canyon NRHS Chapter or the SBRHS for their efforts. I assume you tip your waiter for good service. What's the difference?

wyld@sbcglobal.net

Thanks for the kind words about TVRM. For those who would like to support steam operations, upcoming trips with ticket availability:

Sept 28 "Rails to Wings" - An interesting trip from Chattanooga to LaFayette, Georgia to the local airport which will be hosting historic aircraft during a "fly-in". Also appearing at the festivities will be the Georgia Operation Lifesaver Mobile Educational Exhibit (hosted by the Chattooga & Chickamauga Railway). Included in the ticket price is a dining car luncheon in the 1924-built Southern Railway diner. (610=steam)

"Autumn Leaf Specials" every weekend in October from Chattanooga to Trion, Georgia. Dining car luncheon also included during the all-day excursion trip over C&C's former Central of Georgia mainline. You ought to hear 610 blasting up that 4-mile long, 1.5 % grade! If 1522 is the loudest loco in the USA, 610 is not far behind at #2.

Contact info: TVRM (423) 894-8028 (use extension zero during business hours), email info@tvrail.com, web www.tvrail.com

Shop updates: www.geocities.com/tvrm_classicsteam

sfreer@tvrail.com

Thanks for the kind words about TVRM. For those who would like to support steam operations, upcoming trips with ticket availability:

Sept 28 "Rails to Wings" - An interesting trip from Chattanooga to LaFayette, Georgia to the local airport which will be hosting historic aircraft during a "fly-in". Also appearing at the festivities will be the Georgia Operation Lifesaver Mobile Educational Exhibit (hosted by the Chattooga & Chickamauga Railway). Included in the ticket price is a dining car luncheon in the 1924-built Southern Railway diner. (610=steam)

"Autumn Leaf Specials" every weekend in October from Chattanooga to Trion, Georgia. Dining car luncheon also included during the all-day excursion trip over C&C's former Central of Georgia mainline. You ought to hear 610 blasting up that 4-mile long, 1.5 % grade! If 1522 is the loudest loco in the USA, 610 is not far behind at #2.

Contact info: TVRM (423) 894-8028 (use extension zero during business hours), email info@tvrail.com

Shop updates: www.geocities.com/tvrm_classicsteam

Tennessee Valley Railroad
sfreer@tvrail.com

TVRM Fall Trip Photos
sfreer@tvrail.com

Sir,

As I recall I did not have to pay any admission at the Smithsonian when I visited there in the past. I have paid admission at others, including Calif. State RR Museum.
The organization that I belong to does not charge admission to our display if you visit on our Open House/Work Party weekends, but you will have to pay for admission to the Los Angeles County Fair when it is in session to get to our display, but there still is no charge to see our display.

I have paid for several excursions which included a limited number of photo runs at a pre-selected site away from the general public but that precludes my ability to take a photo from a location of my choosing. For the 3751 trip I was at least able to choose the location and setting for my photos, and I sure that there are other who are doing the same thing.

Yes, organizations need financial help with the increasing cost of insurance, but to put down those who can't afford the trip isn't right. Also, there are those among us who really don't want to ride where the ability to photograph it is really restricted by being on the train.



Southern California Chapter, R&LHS
lstone45@aol.com

Well , I have to say this thread has taken a turn in a new direction. Please excuse any typos,punctuation and bad spelling. Bad spelling I've always been bad with and i'm on a toy computer with a 5 inch screen and "mickey Mouse " keyboard. I'll give you, that you are a good speaker, but you loose me on your arguements.

> I speak, not only as a rail fan, and nascent ( NASCENT , got me on that one , no dictionary present either.)
> preservationist, (and fear not, that I shall
> remain, whether I am wanted or not, as I
> simply love trains to much to stand idly
> by,) but as an amatuer photographer. You
> make the case that if I take pictures of a
> NASCAR event that I couldn't sell them, and
> you're at least partially correct. If I buy
> a ticket to a NASCAR event, I agree to an
> implicit contract that I give up all
> commercial rights to any image I may produce
> of that event. (And this is in the fine
> print of any sporting event. This is how
> they protect their perceived

(NOT perceived, experessly stated and well defined)

right to
> control their images.) Much of this relates
> to trade-mark law, and this is very arcane
> stuff, and wasn't really constructed to
> cover artisitic photography. The idea is
> that NASCAR has a "brand" and I
> cannot sell NASCAR "brand"
> photographs wihtout their express consent.

> Whether this sort of case has been tried in
> U.S. courts with a photograph made from
> public property by someone who did not
> purchase a ticket, and thus is not party to
> that implicit contract, I cannot say.

It has , and they won very easily due to the public nature of the property in which the event took place. That is one reason why cameras are not allowed into private venue concerts. From expierence the legal wranglings involved in producing a NASCAR / Race team product makes you rethink about doing it and rather shooting your self in the head as it is quicker. As for reproduction , if NASCAR subect is covered, visable and identifiable whether artistic or not and you want to reproduce for commercial use YOU can't.
> When I said "never before" I
> really should have said "never in any
> country or society previous to the United
> States, to my knowledge or belief," has
> the idea that someone owns an image been put
> forward, and railfan images made responsibly
> are made from public property.

Oversight forgotten, I'm schooled in Proffesional Photography and Partner in a Graphic Design Studio. An image is owned the instant it is taken by the photographer, except if they were hired to do so and it transfers to the hiring party. Before photography mass reproduction was of written word only you couldn't reproduce a Monet accurately.

> I attempt to suggest that a painting and a
> photograph are really, on some level the
> same thing.

I agree they are and with the reproductive capabilities of todays digital imaging the separation gets even more muddled.

Ethically in any case, they seem
> so to me. Would you say that the SLSTA
> should have some right to collect royalties
> if, say, Leonardo DaVinci by some strange
> chance made a painting of 1522 from some
> memory that he had of it's passing?

YES , they could if Leo was reproducing them enmass like Thomas Kincade ( THE Painter of Light) does. I have contracted for a few paintings of railroad themes, one of the stipulations is that it can not be reproduced into a lithograph. The painter charges more for a painting used for reprodutction limited number prints.

We give
> the artist credit for his skill in executing
> a painting, but we must also give him credit
> for choosing an attractive subject. If a
> good artist deems a locomotive a beautifull
> subject and lovingly and skillfully creates
> a rendering of it, isn't that the highest
> compliment, since we as a society deem his
> asthetic judgement to be the most sound, and
> therefore agree with him, almost implicitly,
> that something he sees as beautifull IS?

I see art in what the guys at Lima did with metal , no matter how functional it is. Or in what the guys at Dodge did with the Viper. But that still doesn't change the fact that you have rights of ownership of certain property both physical and intellectual. Monet paintings can not just be reproduced willy nilly, nor any paintings. If you look at 3751 or any engine, for that matter as sculpture (which in my eyes it is) you can't photograph peoples sculptures and reproduce them for profit. How much the infringed party wants to make a stink about it is another story. People confuse lack of response with public domain.

> Boards of trade and tourism, promote that
> their landmark is the most photographed in a
> particulair region. The University of
> Missouri at Columbia for example, states on
> campus tours that the columns are the second
> most photographed landmark in Missouri,
> thereby capitalizing on that popularity to
> validate themselves, and even locally there
> is little that the University, by all
> appearances has done to restrict the
> propogation of that image. On the SLSTA
> site, George makes note of the fact that
> 1522 is photographed almost every day with
> what appears to me to be obvious pride.
> "Gee, they think we're pretty!"

Plenty of public and private owned buildings are allowed to be photographed and many are are not. YOu want photos,the gift shop is right this way.
Again, People confuse lack of response with public domain.

> The question that I seek to answer is
> whehter or not a photograph is a work of
> art.

YES , it is!!!!!

I believe it is so. Paintings are
> generally agreed to be art, whether they be
> bad, good, or indifferent. What, at base, is
> a painting? It is an image, made by a
> painter, using certain tools, and accordinbg
> to generally agreed conventions of
> composition and color. It may or may not be
> strictly depictive of anything in
> particulair. Fortune may play a roll in it's
> success. (Whether or not the pigments work,
> or it is damaged before the paint has set
> say.) A photograph is also an image, made by
> an individual whom we now call a
> photographer, in respect to the differences
> between painting and photography. He uses
> tools. A camera and film, rather than a
> brush, paint, and a canvas.

> The biggest difference between the two is
> that there is a perception that the camera
> is more important than the photographer, and
> that simply is not true. If you believe that
> Ansell Adams can take a better picture with
> a Kodak Instamatic than the average child
> could with a Hasleblad, then you agree that
> the photographer's skill is more important,
> since by any quantifiable charateristic, the
> Hasleblad far outweighs the instamatic. (And
> I don't have one, by the way, I shoot with a
> cheap second hand seventies Minolta, and
> rely upon my skill to take a decent
> picture.) It has better optics, capable of
> portraying greater detail upon demand, as
> desired by the artists composition of
> course. You can take a fuzzy suggestive
> picture with one if you so choose. Higher
> grades of film are available for the
> Hasleblad. The processing is under the
> control of the photographer, and thereby he
> has a wider range of coloristic or exposure
> effects at his disposal, possibly to correct
> for imperfections in the original shot. In
> short, there is nothing that instematic can
> do that the Hasleblad can't do better.
> They're even about the same size and weight.
> On the other hand, there's a lot the
> Hasleblad can do that is better. And I think
> we can all agree that Ansell Adams still
> took the better picture in our imaginations.
> Why? because we intuitively know that he's a
> better artist. And by a large enough factor
> to FAR overcome the not insignificant
> advantages of the camera our hypothetical
> child used. Thus, if Ansell Adams is an
> artist, and DaVinci is an artist, and all
> painitngs are art, no matter how good, then
> all photographs must be art. No matter how
> good. No matter what the intent.

Yes , to all of it above. Adams's, and Weston's artistry I feel really came out in the darkroom. And I've seen utterly astounding shots from a cardboard box with a pinhole and developing agent hand brushed on the back, and crap from 20,000.00 Linhoff in the hands of a bozo.

But considering that Adams images are the most money making photographs to be taken. We are talking sheer dollars in revenue through marketing , licensing , and exhibition. Yes, there is money to be made in art photography.

> My other basic contention, and this one is
> more subjective, and less objective, is that
> one should not regulate art. It is to my
> mind unethical, and societaly unhealthy to
> say that you should or cannot make art of a
> particulair subject. This is abhorent to me.
> It is what was done by those whom I consider
> to ba amongst the vilest criminals in human
> society. It is amongst the crimes the Romans
> comitted agaist the Christians. It is one
> thing Hitler did to the Jews. They destroyed
> artworks that they found disagreeable, and
> punished those who made them. Art is an
> expression. Freedom of expression smacks
> very close to the principles upon which this
> country was founded, and many consider it to
> be among them. I fail to see the difference
> between, "You can't make that piece of
> art," and "it's irresponsible to
> make that piece of art," or "you
> should pay me before you make that piece of
> art."

One of the things I love to argue second to "freeloading followers" is art. Money drives art,no matter how much you want to deny it. Most "art" is done on commission, you pay me I get creative ( Paint, sculpture, photography , glass , whatever media) MIchael didn't paint the ceiling for free he was hired to do so. Does some art get done just for the creativeness , yes. Is all art for sale , sure as hell is. From your art fair jewelry to high priced paintings it is all done for money.
> This is at it's root a question of
> censorship. There are those amongst us who
> would censor the expression of those who did
> not pay for a particulair excursion.

My opinion, create all you want. The minute I have a problem is when my ( or any operator/crews)work and creative effort ( whether the sculpture I maintain, or my creativity in operating said sculpture as a performance)is infringed by your creative pilfering for a profit, of which I don't get a cut. That is where I have a problem.
This is
> to me coopting the basic rights of all of
> us, when it's something that can be seen
> from the public. You can build a wall, so
> they can't see you. You can make yourself
> ugly, so they don't want to. But you cannot
> reasonably expect people to politely look
> away when you're out in their back yard, and
> public property is the back yard of every
> U.S. citizen, and what's more, every legal
> guest enjoys that basic right as well. I'll
> think you're silly if you drape a robe over
> your face. I'll think it unfortunate if you
> build a concrete wall in front of your
> house. But it's yours, and that's your
> right. You've got to see the wall. You've
> got to see the robe. I'll cry, but I won't
> tell you you shouldn't. On the other hand,
> if you tell me not to take pictures from
> public property without paying you, you're
> telling me that I have to pay you to see
> something. That is an altogether different
> statement.

Man, do you need a hug? Again this issue is a moral and ethical one which we ( the rail community ) must consider to keep visable as art, beauty ,and history the objects we adore. You have to pay to get into any art museum , the vatican , to see david etc.... it doesn't get maintained for free, nethier do our superpower sculptures.

> And I for one, and I hope all that love both
> the art of photography, and the beauty of
> the rails, will do what I can to see that
> those trains are still there for my
> grandkids. And if by some ill fortune
> they're gone, I'll still show you my
> pictures. You may not want to see them if
> you think I ruined your train, but I'd like
> to hope that I'm not doing that. We all love
> trains. Let's all work to preserve them, and
> not waste our time trying to say, "well
> he's not pulling his load." This may be
> an incoherent rant, but I hope that you can
> see some sense in here somewhere. Forgive
> me, but I feel rather strongly about this.

Duude , you really do need a hug.

I feel just as emotional and as strong about it as you and I want it around for my son like it was around for me when I was young. But not paying to keep it going is not the answer, I am not happy with just photos or video I need the live action. OOOPs there telling me to shut done more later.

Rich Young

> Erik,

> That's precisely what the Ohio Central did
> the day before.

Just so, Michael--sorry if I implied otherwise. The OCRR folks are in a class by themselves East of the Mississipi in offering the public an attractive mainline steam excursion experience.

> Going back to a point you made in your
> previous post "we need more operations
> like Steamtown or TVRM, where engines can
> romp on a good 20- to 60- mile length of
> track.." I think you've just described
> the Grand Canyon Railway! I would like to
> suggest that the 3751 folks consider sending
> the engine back to Williams for a year as a
> "guest" engine.

That's JUST the kind of thinking I'm advocating. 3715 on GCRR fulfills my other criteria for success as well--proximity to good lodging and complementary heritage/tourist attractions for other members of the family.

A program of seasonal excursions over GCRR with 3751 pulling an ATSF-like consist would be a huge winner--the right engine, the right train, and an economically viable proposition. The foamer can ride and photograph, the family can join if they care to or pursue other attractions in the area if they don't, the engine can strut her stuff on a good run on jointed rail to which she has historic ties. A far better, more accurate experience in my book than doging intermodals on the main, pulling a canteen car and a CW4400, and afforadable and family-friendly to boot.

If it happens and you organize that charter, e-mail me. :-)

eledbetter@rypn.org

>

This isn't quite true, priority for tickets at NRHS conventions goes to members who preregister for the convention -- quite often when convention events don't sell out, tickets are made available to the public.

Note that this may not be the case for next year's joint NRHS/RLHS convention in Baltimore !

(You should be able to get to a preregistration form from NRHS.com -- see the pdf version of NRHS news)

Bob H

Heavenrich@yahoo.com

Dave Goodheard ran just such a charter last Friday. The 3751 and five harrimans performed magnificently for the photogs following a 4 a.m. departure from Williams. The GCRR is a great playground for the 3751. The multiple runbys on the GCRR were so much more satisfying than the mainline excursion with the diesels right behind. If one can dream....yes the 3751 should be a guest engine at Williams, and yes a ATSF baggage and/or RPO would be a great addition to the harrimans....maybe even some Santa Fe lightweights. But does it make any economic sense for the GCRR?

PS to Eric. My earlier post was in response to the thread, not just your post. My apologies if it sounded critical of your tongue-in-cheek comments....wasn't intended as such.

I noticed that Trainorders.com charges $7.00 for fans to view images that non-paying visitors cannot, (which I personally have no problem with.) I also noticed that many, many posts lauded the great work about 3751 done by the submitting photographers. Fellas, how about an additional $7 apiece for the two sponsoring organizations? (Incidentally, I do not represent or participate in either organization, but I did support the trip.)

wyld@sbcglobal.net

Trainorders.com is a website that a lot of "doers" from the steam programs participate in. They really get their shots in and encourage some sort of contributions if not tickets then the gift shop or a straight donation from the fans. Being beat on by a forum of your peers certainly helps wakeup a lot of folks to real life conditions.

lamontdc@adelphia.net

Mr. Young has sent me an excetionally curteous reply, and I would like to thank everyone hereon for their courtesy and patience. I'd also like to appologize to everyone if I've let my emotion get the best of me. I try to be a rational being, but I'm not. I work with trains because I love them, and not really because I think it's the right thing to do. (Though as it happens, I do think that it's the right thing to do, but my own reasoning is poosibly suspect due to emotional proximity.)

In any case, the thread has drifted into questions of a fairly esoteric nature, largley through my own digression. (And I rather like esoteric thought, as it happens.) If anyone would be interestd to pursue this debate, with the implicit agreement that we'd all be able to walk away friendly, even if we couldn't reach a consensus, I'd be happy to continue the debate, but I don't know what the appropriate venue would be, as it would necessarily become more and more isolated from railroad preservation, and more focuseed on art, and intelectual property. (A question that the internet has obviously made much more complex.) As an artist, (I'm learning the trade of composition, as we speak, and as I have stated before, I enjoy photography as one of my myriad hobbies,) this is something that I enjoy thinking about. But perhaps someone could recomend a better venue, as the lack of steam oil may be wearing on the cylinder linings of many present.

Sincerely,
David Ackerman


david_ackerman@yahoo.com

> But does it make any economic
> sense for the GCRR?

John,

Since the GCRy was able to charge Dave Goodheart double what they were asking for chartering their own engine, I would say that yes, it does make economic sense!

I think this could be a win-win situation for both the 3751 organization and the GCRy. I don't advocate wearing it out in daily use, just some "guest" appearances.

BTW, wouldn't it be nice if the GCRy decided to paint their ABBA Alco set into Warbonnet colors and have 3751 available at the same time? I'm drooling just thinking about it!

a231pacific@aol.com

Also, there are those among us who
> really don't want to ride where the ability
> to photograph it is really restricted by
> being on the train.

Clyde,

I agree with this point, but please, support the organization with a donation when you are through taking that photo at the locatioin of your own choosing. Without that support, your next photo may not include a steam engine!


a231pacific@aol.com

> More to the point is to rethink the way we
> operate large steam engines.

The 261 gang seems to be doing quite well running on the mainline . . .with a durn nice looking trainset too!
What are they doing right ?