relatedly, how will this change (or has this changed?) given the fact that you can get a fairly good quality digital scan of a photo for a relatively low price - and reprint it from the file (or by rescanning) ad infinitum at no additional cost?
seems that as the scanning/digitalization process improves, professional photographers will have an added incentive to sell you the negatives rather than keep a library of negatives (which must also entail a cost) in hopes you'll be back for more later. etb > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Alex Tabarrok > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:57 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Photographers > > > Whenever I get a professional photograph I am always infuriated that > the photographers keep the negatives and then charge me every time I > want a print. This wouldn't be so bad but the system is inefficient > since I move around a lot and can lose track of who holds the negatives > to photographs that I had taken 10 years ago. I have tried several > times to arrange an alternative deal - paying more up front in return > for the negatives - but the photographers always react with horror to > this suggestion and refuse. > I have a two part question. First, why do photographers want the > system this way. (Note that obviously the photographers have a monopoly > over the prints once the prints are taken but that this does not really > answer the question - see Landsburgh's discussion of the popcorn problem > in The Armchair Economist.) Second and relatedly why don't entrants > offer an alternative system? > > Alex > -- > Dr. Alexander Tabarrok > Vice President and Director of Research > The Independent Institute > 100 Swan Way > Oakland, CA, 94621-1428 > Tel. 510-632-1366, FAX: 510-568-6040 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
