Designating in a Will what will happen to my images

[william_h._wiley]

I'm in the process of writing a will and the question came up about what will happen to my digital images when I'm gone. I've been a serious nature and wildlife photographer for decades (www.wmwiley.com) and hate to think that someone will just push Delete and my best images and memories will be gone forever. My wife will inherit my images if I go first, but what happens then is a big question. I have no children of my own and my wife's son and his family are iPhone shooters and probably wouldn't show much interest.

 

So, other than family, what are my options for giving my best images, some of which have been published in magazines and won contests? Like most photographers, there's a story behind every shot and I've written comments to many of my images. Thanks for any feedback.

[henkelphoto]

Have you thought about donating to a university or some wildlife group?

[SCL]

Firstly you should preserve those images and any relevant text on separate media apart from your computer...labelled, packaged and secured in a safe, safety deposit box, or other safe location, so that your executor can easily identify and locate them. Next, when working with your attorney, guesstimate their value - as they will be identified and valued as part of your estate. Unless your wife is particularly interested in these items you can dispose of them without them going thru her - which means they will be taxed only once instead of twice. Hopefully they will represent less than 1/3 of the value of your estate, as under your local law your spouse will be legally entitled to a certain minimum percentage of your estate, usually 1/3-1/2 of the value of your estate, known as the spousal share. Then focus on the dispositive provisions of your estate, which your attorney will discuss with you and as one of those issues, you should decide who or what institution will get the photo related items upon your death as a separate dispositive provision. I'm sure, in addition to the above suggestion, there may be interested parties including local or community based historical or nature groups.

[andylynn]

This is my field, so feel free to send me a message and I can talk you through the basics. Don’t forget that you need to devise both the copies of your works and the copyright.

[JDMvW]

I've spent my life in fields that involve preservation of data. There is a kind of trajectory for historical materials .

 

TREASURE> OLD STUFF (mathom) >TRASH>CURIO>ANTIQUE>TREASURE

 

The tough part is not losing the item in the OLD STUFF > TRASH stage.

 

In Tolkien, mathom was a generic name for items which the Hobbits were unwilling to throw away, but which they had no use for.

 

 

In my experience even treasured items are difficult to curate past the owner's life. Sooner or later, there will be a person in charge of the collection who will decide "why are we keeping this old trash?" and the collection will be thrown out or sold. This happens even in the most reputable museums and archives.

 

The best chance of preserving lies in leaving resources to maintain the collection, because it is indisputable that saving things has real $ costs. Even then a curator may want some "new toy" and may appropriate the funds when no one is looking.:(

 

This was a problem even the Egyptian kings had to deal with:

 

My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away.

[william_h._wiley]

This is great...gives me a lot of direction. I will pursue your suggestions this next week after Easter is over and things are back on track. Nice to know that other people have already tackled issues like this and are willing to share their knowledge. Thanks everyone!

[Nick D.]

"In 2007, two years before she died, Maier failed to keep up payments on storage space she had rented on Chicago's North Side. As a result, her negatives, prints, audio recordings, and 8 mm film were auctioned. Three photo collectors bought parts of her work: John Maloof, Ron Slattery and Randy Prow.

Maloof discovered Maier's name in his boxes but was unable to discover anything about her until a Google search led him to Maier's death notice in the Chicago Tribune in April 2009.[24] In October 2009, Maloof linked his blog to a selection of Maier's photographs on Flickr, and the results went "viral", with thousands of people expressing interest."

Put your hard drives into safe deposit box, make prepayment for few years and hope for the best:)

[The Shadow]

Enjoy life while you can. Don’t try to control too much from beyond the grave.

[William Michael]

This is not my field, however I do know enough of Estate Law to advise that it may be (often is) DIFFERENT in different legislatures:

 

For an example only - "when working with your attorney, guesstimate their value - as they will be identified and valued as part of your estate. Unless your wife is particularly interested in these items you can dispose of them without them going thru her - which means they will be taxed only once instead of twice. Hopefully they will represent less than 1/3 of the value of your estate, as under your local law your spouse will be legally entitled to a certain minimum percentage of your estate, usually 1/3-1/2 of the value of your estate, known as the spousal share."

 

- is absolutely wrong if were applied to me and my estate.

 

(though it might be absolutely correct and totally applicable to your will, where you live)

 

Hence, my first advice is to consult a Lawyer who specializes in Estate Law, with the primary view to establish what constitutes your "estate".

 

And secondly (referring to the 'what happens then' question) to get advice concerning what you can do to tie up things, as you wish them to be tied up.

 

WW

[andylynn]

William is correct - estate law is state-by-state. You need a local lawyer if you want anything reliable.

 

Vivian Meier is also a good example because there were these people who bought prints, negatives and exposed film but the copyright goes to whoever is her intestate heir under Illinois law. I lost track of what is going on in that case but last I saw one of the owners of copies was going through European birth records trying to find an heir so that he could get a copyright license.

 

For most of us, if we want our works to live on the most important and difficult thing is to get a person or organization to actually do something with it. That’s been on my mind lately because my father passed away, leaving a large archive of his research on Freud (he was a psychiatrist and had published historical articles on Freud’s work) and many gigs of digital photos. A prominent Freudian society wanted the academic archive but I’m still not sure whether to try to do anything with the photos. If I had any web development skills I’d set up some nonprofit online museum that people could donate their deceased relatives’ photos to.

[Nick D.]

If I had any web development skills I’d set up some nonprofit online museum that people could donate their deceased relatives’ photos to.

Try Instagram, they accept everything:)

Or maybe something like micro-stocks agencies, they will keep selling them forever, you may even make some money in the end.

[SCL]

Different jurisdictions have different rules - so consulting an estate planning attorney where you live is the best advice, and if you move later on, repeat the process as you may be subject to different rules. I comment having dealt with the unanticipated ramifications of people trying to control from the grave for over 40 years,

[William Michael]

. . . - estate law is state-by-state. . . .

 

And country-by-country.

 

Although after researching the OP's website, it occurred to me that he was probably based in the USA (and I guessed that there might be a variance of Estate Law between the States and Commonwealths contained within the USA), the broader point being made (for all readers of this conversation) was that there can be great variance in Estate Law depending upon legislature.

 

The laws of Copyright also vary depending upon legislature.

 

WW

 

PS. William (the OP William), It's a great collection of pictures in your website and your story is interesting, too.

Edited April 21, 2019 by William Michael

[william_h._wiley]

Thanks everyone for the feedback. Lots to think about and different factors to consider. I'm seeing an attorney later this week and will get the specifics about the state of Nebraska. When I figure it out I may post again.

[William Michael]

. . . When I figure it out I may post again. . .

 

Speaking only for myself, I like to know what results: too few people ever do that, not that it's required - it's just nice.

 

Good luck.

 

WW

[glen_h]

I've spent my life in fields that involve preservation of data. There is a kind of trajectory for historical materials .

 

TREASURE> OLD STUFF (mathom) >TRASH>CURIO>ANTIQUE>TREASURE

 

(snip)

 

It seems that most often cameras skip the trash stage.

 

They are believed to be valuable, even when they aren't.

For most, there are enough around that they don't get to the treasure state,

but stay in antique or curio.

 

In the olden days, drawers full of negatives might be saved, though even then they

can easily go to trash. I have a nice wooden box with my grandfather's negatives.

 

I have a box of slides that I bought from Goodwill for $0.49/pound.

(A small box, so maybe $0.03.)

 

I suspect that many who would have had a negative drawer in the past, now have

no system for keeping JPGs from their cameras (or phones).

 

For many things, including photographs, it takes an expert to separate the curio,

antique, and treasure (and trash), and that doesn't always happen.

[Gary Naka]

Brings up a point.

Today with digital images, it is TOO EASY to "delete" everything, with a press of a mouse button.

 

Unless it is backed up and CLEARLY identified, some unknowing person may erase the files from the drive, to reuse the drive.

Or the estate may donate the computer, with everything on it intact, to some lucky recipient who may or may not understand what he has.

 

The problem here is the family may start the clean up and disposing of stuff, before it is identified and properly dealt with by the executor.

And clean ups can be/are chaos. Things easily disappear into someone car or into the garbage. Instructions told to A may not be relayed to B, who dumps it into the garbage. Or "go into grandpa's office and take what you want, the rest will get thrown out." You think the grandkids will read your labels and notes?

 

I would make TWO backups of the pics, and give the backup drives to TWO relatives who KNOW what is on the drive, and what to do with it after you die. This gets it out of the "clean up" chaos. I say TWO backup drives, in case one of the backup drives fails.

[glen_h]

Brings up a point.

Today with digital images, it is TOO EASY to "delete" everything, with a press of a mouse button.

 

(snip)

 

I have some CF cards that I bought used. Some have pictures on them.

I have not used the ones with pictures yet, though.

[JDMvW]

It seems that most often cameras skip the trash stage.

 

Only the people who bought them new or look at the new prices with a hope that they are still worth more than a pizza.

 

I have been 'gifted' boxes full of P&S film cameras by people who have tried to sell them

[glen_h]

Only the people who bought them new or look at the new prices with a hope that they are still worth more than a pizza.

 

I have been 'gifted' boxes full of P&S film cameras by people who have tried to sell them

 

Oh, you mean almost new cameras.

 

I was thinking about ones from the 1920's to 1960's, when cameras were believed to be valuable.

 

Toys from those years are often thrown away, but cameras sit in drawers for years.

(That is, your Matham stage.)

 

So toys, especially with the original box, are very valuable, while cameras are not.

 

Cameras sit in drawers, and are still there when the curio stage comes, or antique

stage, but are now too common for the treasure stage.

 

Box cameras and folding cameras from the 1920's to 1940's, and many cameras

from the 1950's and 1960's go for $10 to $20 now. (Large pizza is usually more.)

 

But yes, the more recent P&S cameras are going in the trash very soon.

[rossb]

I have always printed my best photos and the kids will keep them. Digital files require active participation and new tech as time passes. I figure my files will not last after my daughter but the prints should be ok for a while. Giving photo books as gifts will sometimes be a lasting thing.

[JDMvW]

I have a suspicion that many photographers secretly wish that their photographs will be posthumously 'discovered' like Mike Disfarmer (LINK).

 

If they survive to the second generation or so, even originally banal images can give a feeling of time and place that will give them a pinch of historical interest.

 

I know I do :cool:

[glen_h]

Secret wish or not, I suspect many believe that their own are more valuable than they really are.

 

Well, many have sentimental value, pictures of family and such. Even scenic vacation pictures,

to remind some of places they have visited are mostly sentimental value.

 

I have a box of negatives from my grandfather, which I mostly haven't looked at.

But one picture, of a Christmas party when I was three, I have scanned.

(He didn't live nearby, so this was a special occasion for him.)

 

The OP may have some pictures that have value other than sentimental, but they

may be of interest to friends and relatives for sentimental value, which should be

enough to want to preserve them.

[dutchsteammachine]

At a local thriftstore i usually buy old digital p/s camera's for a few dollars if they got a memory card inside. Just to see whats on them. Same with their hard drives.

 

You find a suprising amount of school teacher related stuff on old (40/80gb) hard drives. They must be clearing out their storage. Sometimes there is company stuff on them with all the workers drinking beer at some event.

 

As for the camera's, usually family shots, elderly people. They use the camera they got 15 years ago still.

 

 

Its best to give one copy each to two people for redundancy. Try asking local communities if they are interested. History preservers for photos of things and people that no longer exist.

 

Problem becomes, how do you organize everything so a person unknown with them can find what they want.

[kendunton]

Does anyone really care about your pics?

 

Will anyone care about mine? I can't sat I'm bothered, and it is not as if I'm going to care once I'm dead...

[invisibleflash]

Have you thought about donating to a university or some wildlife group?

 

Yes, concur. Or special collection libraries may be of interest. Also check for online digital libraries.

 

Print out the best ones and donate prints as well.

 

If you can't find anyone, give me hi-res copies and I will put them on the Internet Archive. Or you could do it. I have a massive archival collection. But nothing really about nature. I'm willing to start one. Also Wiki Commons. But I don't like as well. They demand commercial use and delete a lot of what I put up.

[invisibleflash]

William is correct - estate law is state-by-state. You need a local lawyer if you want anything reliable.

 

Vivian Meier is also a good example because there were these people who bought prints, negatives and exposed film but the copyright goes to whoever is her intestate heir under Illinois law. I lost track of what is going on in that case but last I saw one of the owners of copies was going through European birth records trying to find an heir so that he could get a copyright license.

 

For most of us, if we want our works to live on the most important and difficult thing is to get a person or organization to actually do something with it. That’s been on my mind lately because my father passed away, leaving a large archive of his research on Freud (he was a psychiatrist and had published historical articles on Freud’s work) and many gigs of digital photos. A prominent Freudian society wanted the academic archive but I’m still not sure whether to try to do anything with the photos. If I had any web development skills I’d set up some nonprofit online museum that people could donate their deceased relatives’ photos to.

 

This stuff has to be done while alive. Someone that is not in the know may not come through.

[2d]

What about following Brett Weston's path and burning everything letting the next generation create their own images.

 

Let's say you have some really cool images that people want to actually use down the road - hypothetically. As a wildlife photographer your archived images could very easily miscommunicate what is actually out there anymore and while the thought of the images providing some altruistic info for future knowledge may be tantalizing more than likely if they are actually used it will likely be to promote some unforeseen commercial endeavor that you may very well not of agreed with. As for a will protecting that, well it's hard enough for photographers to protect their images when they are alive and want to fight against the infringers.

[glen_h]

Reading the original question again, I don't see much mention of monetary value.

If others are likely to delete them, it seems that they don't, either.

 

I have many pictures that might have sentimental value to various people.

 

Some pictures, back to elementary school 50 years ago, are now on

Facebook, and have been tagged. Many that I never got around to printing

so many years ago, are now scanned and available.

 

As mentioned above, one possibility is to release them to public domain, possibly

through a web site specifically for that purpose.