Feedback Please - My First Tarot Deck

Adam McLean

I don't understand how you seem so clear that you
have the right to use copyright images in your tarot deck.

Your cards seem to be based primarily on 19th century
classical style paintings. Being 19th century does not
mean one has the right to reproduce these from modern
colour photographs or scans. The owner of the painting,
a museum or gallery, still retains ownership of the right
to reproduce an image from a modern photograph of their
paintings. Often they contract this right out to one of the
commercial picture libraries who make rather large charges
for this.

The image in a 19th century painting is not itself copyright,
thus one can paint a facsimile copy of a classic artwork,
but one cannot use modern photographs from which
to make printed reproductions.

You say "considerations of copyright have been addressed"
and "Photoshop and copyright images I have purchased".
Are these 'copyright free' images? Are you sure you have bought
the right to reproduce along with buying the image? In my
experience museums and commercial picture libraries charge
well over $100 for the use of a photograph like this.

Commercial picture libraries will sue anyone breaching their
copyright so make sure you have understood the copyright
rules before publishing the images.

It is also strange that you think to apply your own copyright
notice over these images. If these are public domain images
(which I wonder about) then you cannot obtain copyright over
them. No museum or commercial picture library would allow
you to assert copyright over their images.

It might seem great if people could just lift images from
modern books use them to make tarot cards. A few people
do this, Swwooshie, for example, but they avoid pursuit
for copyright infrigment because their work is obscure and
not widely promoted. I think that before you put long, long
hours into creating the deck, you make sure you have
watertight clearance on your right to copy these images
and use them in a published deck.

There is little problem is doing this as a virtual deck
produced as low resolution images (unprintable) and placed
on a web site. No one is ever pursued for using material
(even though it is within copyright) on web sites. You will find
many examples of this in the decks of F.J. Campos.
 

baba-prague

Adam McLean said:
No one is ever pursued for using material
(even though it is within copyright) on web sites. You will find
many examples of this in the decks of F.J. Campos.

Actually, I'd disagree - I've heard of many, many cases of people being asked to remove copyrighted images from websites (particularly if the site has any commercial aspects). It's becoming increasingly the case that owners will act on website violations for both still and moving images (look at the huge number of things removed from You Tube recently).

As far as your general comments about copyright are concerned, yes, I also had questions about this. As you know, we went to very substantial expense (and a lot of time) to track down antique books of engravings for use in the Victorian Romantic precisely so that we didn't break any copyrights. Of course, if one could just scan in from modern art books it would save huge amounts of effort and money - but it's also clearly not allowed under copyright law.

It may be, though, that Riverdancer is using a copyright-free source such as Wiki Commons. The problem then is more one of resolution, as yes, the images tend to be very poor quality - too much so for decent printing usually.

We do seem to go over this copyright question rather often here, but thanks for pointing it out again - it does save time and upset if people understand the copyright rules before putting too much work into a deck. But let's see what Riverdancer says - this may all be dealt with already.

Oh - by the way, the issue about asserting copyright over old images. This DOES apply when you make substantial changes to the image so that it becomes a new creative work in its own right (again, this is why our VR images can and are copyrighted - we did a great deal of collaging, redrawing and of course all the colouring). However, I agree with you that in the case of Riverdancer's work on some cards this might be at issue. But where she has substantially changed the image by collaging etc, I think she is entitled to add her own copyright - though I say this with all the usual provisos about not being a lawyer etc etc.
 

Riverdancer

Adam McLean said:
I don't understand how you seem so clear that you
have the right to use copyright images in your tarot deck.

...


There is little problem is doing this as a virtual deck
produced as low resolution images (unprintable) and placed
on a web site. No one is ever pursued for using material
(even though it is within copyright) on web sites. You will find
many examples of this in the decks of F.J. Campos.

I appreciate your concern, Adam McLean, and thank you very much for bringing up this very important issue. One can never be too careful when it comes to copyright. I do believe, however, that I have done everything in my power to protect myself. I have negotiated with the museum that is the source of all the images I am using (paintings) and have paid for the use of these images in the compilation, reproduction and publishing of my cards, after extensive correspondence, contacts and clarification concerning their use. None of these images are public domain. As to the other elements in my cards, I have obtained permission from their authors to use them in whatever combination and number I desire.

Some might find that 600 or 300dpi is low resolution, but the printing presses I have contacted assure me that for the size of the printed cards, these resolutions will serve adequately.

As to my own copyright over the images I have created as compilations, my copyright pertains to the whole, not to the originally copyrighted images. I would not wish anyone to appropriate even my VR cards as I have compiled them digitally.

Furthermore, I will not be sharing all the cards, here. Again, because of the agreement reached with my source.

I do thank you, again, Adam. It is wonderful to know we are looking out for each other, here. :)
 

Adam McLean

Riverdancer said:
I have negotiated with the museum that is the source of all the images I am using (paintings) and have paid for the use of these images in the compilation


That is good to hear. You have obviously done things the right way.
It is very dispiriting for people to spend the months necessary
to produce a deck - only to find that they cannot afford the rights
to publish it !

I look forward to seeing your deck in production, and will
definitely be one of your first customers.
 

Riverdancer

baba-prague said:
It may be, though, that Riverdancer is using a copyright-free source such as Wiki Commons. The problem then is more one of resolution, as yes, the images tend to be very poor quality - too much so for decent printing usually.

We do seem to go over this copyright question rather often here, but thanks for pointing it out again - it does save time and upset if people understand the copyright rules before putting too much work into a deck. But let's see what Riverdancer says - this may all be dealt with already.

Thank you, also, Baba-Prague, for bringing this up. I value your expertise in these matters having faced them yourself.

I believe that I have clarified everything with my source and come to the necessary agreements, including financial ones, re. the paintings I will be using. As for the other elements, permission has been obtained where necessary.

One can never be too careful when it comes to copyright issues. Artists are entitled to protect what is their intellectual property in every way, and rightly so.


Oh - by the way, the issue about asserting copyright over old images. This DOES apply when you make substantial changes to the image so that it becomes a new creative work in its own right (again, this is why our VR images can and are copyrighted - we did a great deal of collaging, redrawing and of course all the colouring). However, I agree with you that in the case of Riverdancer's work on some cards this might be at issue. But where she has substantially changed the image by collaging etc, I think she is entitled to add her own copyright - though I say this with all the usual provisos about not being a lawyer etc etc.

Yes, my copyright watermark is only to avoid lifting of the VR images as I have compiled them and because I do have a registered company by this name. Again, if I have done this, I am doing it with the knowledge of my source.

I will only be sharing a fraction of my cards. I am heartened at the encouragement and hope to continue my project. :)

Your comments, questions and advice are always very, very welcome.
 

Riverdancer

Adam McLean said:
That is good to hear. You have obviously done things the right way.
It is very dispiriting for people to spend the months necessary
to produce a deck - only to find that they cannot afford the rights
to publish it !

I look forward to seeing your deck in production, and will
definitely be one of your first customers.

I couldn't agree more! I can't think of anything more devastating than reaching the end of such a labour of love only to have one's hopes completely dashed. Self-publishing is expensive enough as it is.

Why, thank you! I am so glad that you find my cards to your liking. I will hold you to your offer to be among my first customers, Adam McLean; more inspiration towards the fulfilment of my dream.
 

Star-Willow

Riverdancer said:
Here is my Ace of Cups:

aceofcupswithwatermarkgs8.jpg


The cards are being create with the required 6.53mm margin for bleeding, so the actual cards should be, if all goes well, 140 x 95mm. Because of the 300 resolution, images will appear much bigger than they will be, once the cards are printed.

In this case, at the bottom, the card should end where there is a line under the pool of water. :)

Questions, comments, advice and all manner of feedback is, as always, very much appreciated. Thank you.

Hello Riverdancer :)

I'm a little confused by this card, when I see Aces of any suit, I get an excited feeling, you know, new beginnings to something, but I don't get that with this image, I feel that in this image the girl is kind of scared of her emotions and not sure if she is making the right decision or not. I think a cup/chalice somewhere within the image would give a clearer idea of it being an *Ace*. The colours are, once again, beautiful and fit well with your other cards.

As always, looking forward to the next card :)
:heart:
 

MeeWah

Riverdancer: Apologies for being so late to this. Still reading thread, but want to express thoughts on the first Empress before I forget again, & my choice to represent the card.

Like her upright posture (as opposed to the leaning of the other two images), steady gaze & the urn she holds upright. As moreorless the consort of The Emperor, invested with the qualities of her 'station', that of a natural authority & power. Does not falter in carrying out her knowledge. Particularly like the presence of the urn, & as symbolic of all that possessed of resources.
 

On a clear day

Wow! What beautiful images! I think this would be a stunning tarot deck.
Please include me in the list of would-be buyers!

I personally favour the first image for the Empress. She looks older and more worldy-wise. More nurturing. Someone you could turn to for help/wisdom.

The second lady I feel would be a good queen -not sure which queen though! (Am very new to the Tarot-just a baby still learning here!)

The death card is simply divine!

In fact can't say a negative word at all.

Well done and when can I buy the deck??? ; )