Well, it's not just about monitizing the images when the public buys the books; it's also about the Collector himself monitizing the images by collecting all those images and then selling them to the publisher for use in the book in the first place.
The photos are all credited "Courtesy of ..." which suggests they were provided free of charge; and the publisher has also stated, I think, online that the pics were freely provided to them.
Why do you continue to try to demonize people and always assume the worst intentions of everyone involved in the project? What a horrible way to live one's life.
Oh, I give the publisher and the Collector the benefit of the doubt and trust them at the demonstrably fine word. But we can never really
know for sure.
It's also possible that, although the images were provided free of charge, the Collector is getting a cut of the book sales. So that's monetizing the images while sill having provided them as a "courtesy."