Sort:  

Not so fast @benfink! Technically I didn't have to credit this work at all, not even to Van Gogh himself. While the physical copy resides in Musée d'Orsay (correctly identified by @kenfinkel), the work itself is public domain in both its country of origin and the United States. From the image's online source:

This work is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 100 years or less.

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1923.

Agreed, but setting the bar low and leaving off relevant and useful information - while not a crediting crime - is a flaw. In such cases, there's a hierarchy of information. The artist and location of the original are essential, in my view. The date, medium and size of the original are useful, though less important. I know it's a burden for the writer, but there are at least two versions of this painting in different museums. It may be only an illustration in this case, but it's also an authentic artifact that should be accompanied by at least some of it's critical metadata.

Thanks for the feedback @kenfinkel. I am unaccustomed to citation conventions for works of art, and I have edited the post to reflect the this piece's location.

Ah, much better... Thank you.

im glad my students can't wiggle their way out of citations as well as you @somethingburger "Technically" my butt :P

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.16
JST 0.030
BTC 67971.67
ETH 2643.41
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.67