This comment doesn't deserve those downvotes. You are right those pictures are much more important than those I take, but to follow that to its logical conclusion then we only get those amazing pictures in the public domain if the public is willing to pay a lot for them. In theory that could be done using e.g Patreon but in practice that probably has to be done using the, admitably broken, copyright system.
> You are right those pictures are much more important than those I take, but to follow that to its logical conclusion then we only get those amazing pictures in the public domain if the public is willing to pay a lot for them.
That conclusion does not follow. The pictures will become public domain if and when the copyright expires on them. Assuming that happens.
That's a friend of mine who died 3 years ago, he made the most amazing pictures. 50,000 of them in a archive in his home in Suprasl, and we can't even find the funds to properly digitize them so they will likely be lost sooner or later.
The historical way lots of content came into the public domain is death.
That's why plenty of artists [...] died relatively penniless.
can you expand on this? how does lifelong copyright cause artist poverty? i'm not signalling either dis- or agreement, but your claim needs to be substantiated.
