Commons:Requests for comment/Does PDART apply to textile works
 | An editor has requested comment from other editors for this discussion. If you have an opinion regarding this issue, feel free to comment below. |
What is the correct license for photographs of old textile works, like the remnants of cloths or historic flags?
Specifically, can the image linked from [1] (showing the remnants of a flag from 1854) be considered to be in the public domain per COM:PDART, or does the museum regain copyright through the choice of framing, lighting, and the work involved in creating that photograph? This question has arisen at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Theeurekaflag.jpg; see there for some arguments for and against applying PDART to it. It is unclear both if textile works would be closer to a flat canvas (2D, OK) or an old coin (3D, not OK), and what the threshold of originality should be.
Some background: The PDART policy states that some photographs can not themselves be copyrighted, if they are faithful reproduction of an old, public domain, two-dimensional work of art. The policy further explains what is meant by that, stating: When a photograph demonstrates originality (typically through the choice of framing, lighting, point of view and so on), it qualifies for copyright even if the photographed subject is itself uncopyrighted. This is typically the case for photographs of three-dimensional objects, hence the rule of thumb that "2D is OK, 3D is not". Renerpho (talk) 18:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)