ripping webarchives with historic or art photos

Hello.
Are there people out there who like to collect digital art or photos
by ripping online archives? I've photographed paintings and sculptures
myself in museums and on art-fares, but I've realized it's often much
easier to try and download all the graphics from a site which offers
access to a large collection of photographs or artworks in digital
form. Often these websites try to prevent people from downloading
their material, but sometimes I know there might be technical
sollutions like software hack that would allow saving streaming or
flash content from websites to disk for instance.
Does anyone know of any such utility that might allow me to
automatically collect all photos from a site which features a historic
archive in high resolution (via a flash interface)?
An example of a nice site of historic pictures from Amsterdam in Dutch
that I'd like to rip (but I'd also be interested in similar digital
online archives that are publically accessible):

http://beeldbank.amsterdam.nl/compon...qtype=nieuw&q=

(same as http://tinyurl.com/2ajym8 )

sobriquet wrote:
Hello.
Are there people out there who like to collect digital art or photos
by ripping online archives? I've photographed paintings and sculptures
myself in museums and on art-fares, but I've realized it's often much
easier to try and download all the graphics from a site which offers
access to a large collection of photographs or artworks in digital
form. Often these websites try to prevent people from downloading
their material, but sometimes I know there might be technical
sollutions like software hack that would allow saving streaming or
flash content from websites to disk for instance.
Does anyone know of any such utility that might allow me to
automatically collect all photos from a site which features a historic
archive in high resolution (via a flash interface)?
An example of a nice site of historic pictures from Amsterdam in Dutch
that I'd like to rip (but I'd also be interested in similar digital
online archives that are publically accessible):

http://beeldbank.amsterdam.nl/compon...qtype=nieuw&q=

(same as http://tinyurl.com/2ajym8 )


Are you asking me to abet a felony? Museums are publicly
accessible, but you aren't supposed to walk out with one of
the paintings under your arm.

On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:39:50 GMT, Marvin wrote:

Are you asking me to abet a felony? Museums are publicly
accessible, but you aren't supposed to walk out with one of
the paintings under your arm.

Museums do not own the copyright to old paintings and art.

For a related example check out Project Gutenburg's archives of thousands and
thousands of historically important literature, perfectly legal and free to
distribute to anyone anywhere across the whole world.

Get your head out of your control-freak-induced-paranoia ass.

Just because you are so easily manipulated by today's self-appointed net-cops
and would love to be just like them doesn't mean everyone falls for their
juvenile crap.

On 13 sep, 23:39, Marvin wrote:
sobriquet wrote:
Hello.
Are there people out there who like to collect digital art or photos
by ripping online archives? I've photographed paintings and sculptures
myself in museums and on art-fares, but I've realized it's often much
easier to try and download all the graphics from a site which offers
access to a large collection of photographs or artworks in digital
form. Often these websites try to prevent people from downloading
their material, but sometimes I know there might be technical
sollutions like software hack that would allow saving streaming or
flash content from websites to disk for instance.
Does anyone know of any such utility that might allow me to
automatically collect all photos from a site which features a historic
archive in high resolution (via a flash interface)?
An example of a nice site of historic pictures from Amsterdam in Dutch
that I'd like to rip (but I'd also be interested in similar digital
online archives that are publically accessible):

http://beeldbank.amsterdam.nl/compon...lt/Itemid,9/?b...

(same ashttp://tinyurl.com/2ajym8)

Are you asking me to abet a felony?

Oh right sorry, I forgot.. in the fascist police states of America
it's illegal to think. Please forget everything I said.

Museums are publicly
accessible, but you aren't supposed to walk out with one of
the paintings under your arm.- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -

- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though). But apparently you have
difficulties distinguishing between the concepts of taking something
away and duplicating something.

sobriquet wrote:
- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though).

If you do this, can I have a copy of the photo you take please?

I want to make a CD to sell on eBay.

TIA.

BugBear

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 10:53:16 +0100, bugbear
wrote:

sobriquet wrote:
- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though).

If you do this, can I have a copy of the photo you take please?

I want to make a CD to sell on eBay.


If he posts it on the internet I bet he wouldn't mind in the least, but you
wouldn't have any rights to sell it. That is exactly what all the photos on the
internet are for, for everyone in the world to view them. Only an idiot would
think that they have a way to keep the low-resolution image from being
duplicated or that they somehow still have any distribution control over that
downsized copy that they posted. It's duplicated through a dozen servers and
routes every time anyone views it, and a copy is saved to anyone's cache that
views it. You lost the control to the smaller image the very moment you posted
it to the net. Now if you wanted the original full resolution copy you'd
probably have to ask him. Then you'd have to work out a deal for distribution
rights. Having the original full resolution copy is often used to prove when
someone else is trying to financially benefit off of your work.

Compile all the CDs that you want of images from the net. Guess how many buyers
you're going to get -- NONE. Since those images are already free to anyone. The
only person you could sell it to would be another idiot like yourself.

Get a clue, idiot.

I swear the average IQ and common-sense level of the internet drops hourly.


By the way, sobriquet, if the images that you want to archive for yourself are
contained in SWF files, there are many flash decompilers available that do just
that. They take apart the data in an SWF file and save it as their original
components. You need only retrieve the SWF file from your browser's cache then
run it through a flash decompiler.

I do this often to see how some things are done.

There are also "save flash" utilities that save flash animations and movies from
web pages so you don't even have to look in your cache for the respective files.
Do searches for "flash decompiler" or "save flash utility".

Any non-ignorant web-page builder knows that Flash is not a copy-protection
method. It's only an alternate, and sometimes more "cutesy", display method for
sharing their images and movies. People that wrongly believe, or were lead to
believe, that putting their images into SWF files is some kind of copyright
protection have been sorely lied to and taken advantage of. Just as those who
once believed that invisible watermarking was an effective method. As soon as
everyone found out that you only needed to do a slight rotation and back on any
watermarked image that it would disappear, then the scam became known. Digimarc
scammed everyone really good, and they still try to, and fools still fall for
it. Then we have companies like Adobe that just love perpetuating that scam and
myth for their own financial gain.

On 14 sep, 11:53, bugbear wrote:
sobriquet wrote:
- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though).

If you do this, can I have a copy of the photo you take please?

You can. However, the photo's would be provided as is (many of them in
the wrong orientation, some blurred or the colors being off, etc..)
and I would suggest there are more interesting collections you can
download via bittorrent. I can provide you with links where you can
download these. At the moment I have a massive 25 gigabyte collection
of over 44000 pics of artworks and historic photographs.
I put various collections together and used a util like dupdetector to
remove duplicate artworks. Makes a great slideshow.


I want to make a CD to sell on eBay.

Personally I think there is a difference between selling and sharing,
but in principle you can try this (it would be your responsibility if
you get into trouble for trying to exploit the stuff obtained via
filesharing commercially). I personally prefer to share information
(music, videos, software, graphics, ebooks, audiobooks, etc..) for
free on p2p. Internet is the ultimate library where you can find
virtually everything and you never need to return anything.


TIA.

BugBear

On 14 sep, 14:32, sobriquet wrote:
At the moment I have a massive 25 gigabyte collection
of over 44000 pics of artworks and historic photographs.

Correction, over 122000 pics.

sobriquet wrote:
On 14 sep, 11:53, bugbear wrote:
sobriquet wrote:
- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though).
If you do this, can I have a copy of the photo you take please?

You can. However, the photo's would be provided as is (many of them in
the wrong orientation, some blurred or the colors being off, etc..)

No. Can you tidy them up, and then put them up on a server for
me please?

BugBear

On 14 sep, 15:04, bugbear wrote:
sobriquet wrote:
On 14 sep, 11:53, bugbear wrote:
sobriquet wrote:
- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
In most museums (at least where I live, in the Netherlands), you can
take your camera into a musuem and take pictures fo the artworks they
have on display (without a flash though).
If you do this, can I have a copy of the photo you take please?

You can. However, the photo's would be provided as is (many of them in
the wrong orientation, some blurred or the colors being off, etc..)

No. Can you tidy them up, and then put them up on a server for
me please?

BugBear

No, because I found out that this is too much work and it's much
easier to download collections of art and pics on p2p instead (or
ripping an occasional art site). If I had actually taken the effort to
clean up the pics and make a nice collection of it, I would be willing
to share it, but I didn't and all I can offer you, if you insist, is
the raw collection of photographs (the actual originals) and then you
can tidy them up if you like (and I would appreciate it if you share
the results of that). But why would you want go over the effort to
optimize a rather small collection of pictures from artworks, granted
that some are in high resolution (1 to 5 MP) when you can obtain a
massive art collection from p2p instead, though the resolution is
usually more in the 640x480 to 1 MP range?