a woman like that & Some Thoughts on Copyright

Today I attended the presentation of a documentary film about Artemisia Gentileschi, a 17th-century female artist and painter. The 93 minute film, entitled a woman like that, combines filmmaker Ellen Weissbrod's own coming of middle age story with her quest to learn more about this evocative artist. You can read more about it on the film's website here. The presentation and discussion of the film was promoted by the Saint Louis Art Museum and presented in the Brown Auditorium at Washington University in St. Louis. After the film viewing, Dr. Judith Mann, Curator of European Art to 1800 at the Saint Louis Art Museum (and a friend of mine), gave a short presentation about a recently discovered cache of Artemisia letters. The whole experience was very enlightening and not only presented new and interesting facts about Artemisia, but also struck on some prevalent museum issues.

The most significant issue discussed, which dominates the opening of the film, concerns the copyright restrictions of artworks in museums. The film begins back in 2002 with a dismayed Ellen talking into her camera about how she had just received an email from the Saint Louis Art Museum denying her permission to film the exhibition Orazio and Artemisia Gentileschi: Father and Daughter Painters in Baroque Italy. Not allowing this upset to prevent her from pursuing her goals, Ms. Weissbrod purchased a hidden filming device and drove all the way from New York City to St. Louis. Using her James Bond-esque equipment, which involved a pair of camera-spectacles, she filmed her stroll through the Saint Louis Art Museum's special exhibition gallery and the paintings of Artemisia and Orazio Gentileschi. Her adorably covert operation spurred her on to continue her quest for the woman behind the artist. I really enjoyed and highly recommend her film.

There are clearly no hard feelings on the part of the Saint Louis Art Museum about Ellen's actions or filming techniques. The film is in fact being embraced and promoted by the Art Museum. It was described to me by my friend as "a very personal look at Artemisia, with humor and some real insights," and I was encouraged to attend and bring friends. So why all the red tape when the Ellen initially wanted to film? Dr. Mann explained during a question and answer session that the Saint Louis Art Museum was unable to acquire permission from all the loaning museums to film the artworks. When they could not guarantee the permission of all the loaners they had to tell Ellen she could not film. After this explanation, Ellen also made it a point to state how great and supportive staff at the museum have been in helping her complete this project. The truth is many museums have to be very mindful of copyright when they are borrowing artworks from other institutions. There is a really great post about this type of issue on the blog Musematic entitled Museums Are Not the Enemy.

The copyright of museum images is a topic of growing concern for museums all over the world. In an age when information can be shared instantly in a digital format on the world wide web, art institutions are encountering new challenges and issues concerning the ownership of the images of their artworks. There is a very great article about this in the American Association of Museum's Museum Magazine entitled "Copyright Clearance for Online Images: A Lesson Learned." This is a different aspect of the copyright debate, but it still relates to the issues Ellen Weissbrod encountered on her journey.

Another related issue is when museums charge publications for the right to print images of their artworks, thus gaining a profit from their copyrighted images. There are some that disapprove of this. They ask why do museums "sell" images of artworks that they hold in trust for the general public? If the artworks are already rightfully ours to be shared, then why are the images not also shared? I have heard that museums will often use their copyrighted images in order to help raise funds to care for the collections. This seems fair; if copyright enables institutions to secure additional dollars to care for the artworks then maybe it's a small inconvenience the public can pay for the greater good. On the other side of the coin, I have also heard it argued that using staff time and energy in order to deal with photography and image rights issues ends up costing the museum more money than they gain. I really cannot say if it's either-or unless I spend some quality time with the budget reports, which I doubt I can get my hands on. But if so, why all the hard work? Do you have any insight on this debate? If you do, please share.

The copyright of museum images is not the prevailing theme of this film, but it is a significant topic I wanted to spend some time discussing. As far as the documentary is concerned, if you get an opportunity please do watch it. You will learn a lot about Artemisia and have a few laughs along the way. As you watch, spend a little time pondering poor Ellen's plight at the beginning of the film.

Do you think she should have been allowed to film or did the Saint Louis Art Museum make the right ethical choice? Do you find Ellen's actions in any way inappropriate or do you think she crossed a line in her attempt to film the exhibition? What are your experiences with some of the above-mentioned copyright issues?