I’ve been working away on identifying possible images for my book about post-war museums. Three things have struck me. The first is how relatively straightforward it is to identify good quality, and sometimes great, architectural photographs, using Google Images. The second is that the great images are, perhaps unsurprisingly, by well-known photographers whose work I should have known about, including, for example, Ezra Stoller’s wonderful photographs of the Whitney Museum and Kimbell, Balthazar Korab’s of the Neue Galerie in Berlin, and Kemal Emden’s of the Yale Center for British Art. But then, the third is how expensive they are to reproduce. So, the question is how far it’s possible to maintain the quality of the images. Or does one just debase ?
| Charles | Saumarez | Smith | 
Photos ARE very expensive. We had the same experience on my Museums book, where our initial choices would have cost an impossible sum, because the Bridgeman Art Library were lethal.
We got round it, partly by choosing different images, and by individual negotiations, pointing out that it was better for the museum to be included, by offering free copies and by smooth talking !
Dear Mark, Sounds like good advice ! Charles
I imagine that the press office of the Milwaukee Art Museum would send you excellent photos of the Calatrava extension without fees…