PDA

View Full Version : person(s) photographing paintings at an opening ...


sketchZ1ol
11-07-2010, 02:58 PM
hello
what do you think ?

i was at an opening of a juried show (with prizes) yesterday, and
here's this woman, not mingling or talking to the prize winners
going around taking pictures of all the ribbon pieces !

it was all i could do not to bust her camera
and boot her butt out the door !

she was too smartly/stylishly dressed and old enough to know better
and had ' playing dumb ' all worked out

or was i overreacting ?

:} Ed

water girl
11-07-2010, 03:06 PM
That's a tough one. I notice many people taking photos at art show receptions. Even if it's posted that photos are prohibited, there are always cell phone cameras. I'm guessing that if it's not posted, it's permitted. That's just my opinion.

Deborah Secor
11-07-2010, 03:13 PM
I understand your feelings, but maybe it is a little overreaction, since you haven't said whether she was one of the show promoters, or a reporter, or possibly had been asked or paid by the show to do some recording of the winners... Personally, in the same situation, I'd have quietly stepped in front of her and asked her if she was working with/for the show promoters, or possibly I'd have spoken to someone involved with the show's presentation to see if they were aware of what she was doing and let them handle it. There's no telling why she was shooting the photos, without asking her--but it's a GOOD question!

I had many occasions throughout the years I was showing (primarily at at fairs or booth shows) to step in front of people with cameras and block their view of my paintings, smiling as I explained why I'd prefer they not do that. Some were genuinely surprised, others became defensive ("I'm out here on a public street!"), and there were a few who had their own motives, too. No way to know without asking!

It isn't too late to point this out to the show promoters, since they might need to clarify the policy regarding photos of the work for those minding the show. It sometimes takes a little chutzpah to step in front of that camera... :)

Colorix
11-07-2010, 03:45 PM
Um, would you enlighten a poor foreigner, an alien, as to why a pic of a painting would be a problem? (Or, of the ribboned ones, or of the whole show?) This is a genuine question, I do not understand.

I get copyright (using the photos for gain, or painting copies, or whatever). I understand museums who sell prints/DVDs etc, and not wanting zillions of photons from flashes bombarding the precious paintings speeding aging of them.

And, of course, if it is not allowed, then that's simply it.

Devonlass
11-07-2010, 04:58 PM
I'm with Charlie on this. I would take it as a compliment if someone liked my picture enough to want to take a photo of it. It could also be that the person in question had been asked by the organization putting on the show to take a photographic record of the winners.

Adriana Meiss
11-07-2010, 05:12 PM
As Deborah said, you better check with the show promoters first, and file a complaint with them if that is in the bylaws.

At a local guild show taking photos is prohibited. Every member knows this and the policy is reinforced when we see someone else trying to take pics. Artist are allowed to take photos of their own set up before the show opens to the public.

At other shows I have attended I always ask if it is allowed to take pics. My reason for doing so, it's mostly to get ideas about framing. Anyway, I doubt anyone is able to get good pictures under exhibit conditions to try doing something illegal with them.

If this issue bothers you, you have the right to voice your thoughts to the organizing committee.

*Deirdre*
11-07-2010, 06:52 PM
The shows I mainly exhibit at also have the no photos rule....It's fairly standard over here...

sketchZ1ol
11-07-2010, 07:58 PM
hello
Karen - i understsnd your point about opportunity with tech toys
this person apppeared to be collecting images
with no consideration/ explanation of intent
i was standing next to her in front of the Best in Show
the artist was standing right there ...
and there was no conversation before the camera was aimed
not with the artist in the frame, but the painting only

Deborah - yes, good point, i did not ask that question about promotion
by the same token, when i said, ' i see you're taking pictures of the winners '
the response was a dumb look/silence ...
and i felt hot to that
and tried to find some way to explain the disrespect
(could be a subject for a painting ! )
i will bring the issue to the art association
even if they ' nudge the judge ' re. my future entries

Charlie - if someone takes a pix of a painting that you made
without your permission ... ?

Carol - let me see if i get this right :
your painting is significant enough to photograph
but not to purchase ...


Adriana - sound like the local group is very clear
and that keeps things simple, kiss
introducing yourself is polite, and why not ?

Deidre - clear and direct

:} Ed

DAK723
11-07-2010, 08:31 PM
Whenever I have been in an art show with the local art club that I am a member of, there is always someone from the club documenting the winners by photo. Hopefully, that was the case here. If it was not someone who already had permission, then they should get that permission first, in my opinion.

Why would I mind? The person taking the pics is getting for free what they would normally be paying for. If you want an image of my painting then I would hope that you would buy the original or a print. I might also have notecards or postcards for sale. But if you want it for free - sorry, I will probably object. (OK, if you ask me nicely, I would probably give permission - but I am not depending on my art sales to live - thank goodness! :) )

Or, if you are an artist looking for ideas, well, I would object to your copying my painting without my permission, just as I would object if you copied (and painted) a painting from my blog or from WC. Granted, with the internet this is probably happening much more than in the pre-internet days. But if you want to copy my painting, ask me first.

Don

allydoodle
11-07-2010, 10:26 PM
I have been a member of an art club for over 18 years, and we do at least two to three shows per year. Each and every artist in the club (at least to my knowledge), objects to strangers coming in and taking pictures of the artwork displayed at the show. We have a sign posted, and we do enforce it. Each year, at our annual members show, this woman shows up in a trench coat, camera in hand, trying to take pictures of the artwork. I kid you not, she actually wears a trench coat! We wait for her to arrive, and tell her if she wants to view the work she has to hand over her camera. Upon leaving the venue, her camera will be returned. She's never too happy about it, and huffs out of the building. Many of my collegues are very disturbed by her actions, and feel her taking pictures of the artwork is like stealing. I agree wholeheartedly, as I for one work hard to create my work, and don't appreciate a person feeling it is okay to just "walk off" with an image and not pay for it. Who knows what she intends to do with it.

I guess one could look at it like a compliment, but I for one, agree with Don. If you like it, then either admire it or buy it, but to take it home for free, well, not so much...... I don't need or care about a compliment, but the sale would be nice.

As far as posting our work on the internet, Don is right on there as well. I agree that if you want to copy my painting for any reason, please ask first. And if I say yes, then give me credit for the original image. I definitely object to anyone copying it without asking. That has happened to me recently on Wet Canvas. I posted a painting quite some time ago, not as a lesson that others could follow, but just as a painting I did, not even a WIP. Someone painted it recently, and posted it in the Pastel Gallery. I wasn't too pleased, but I guess like Don said, posting our work here on WC or on the internet on a blog or website opens you up for this kind of thing. I'm sure it happens all the time. I'm just not happy when I find out about it.

Now, copying a painting from a purchased "how to" book, and giving full credit to the original artist, and not selling the painting, but keeping it for your own records, is okay in my opinion. It's a great way to learn, and I'm sure the artists that write these books expect people to copy the paintings in them as part of the learning process. Again, I wouldn't sell them, they are just for my personal records.

My 2 cents...... Sorry for the ramble.....

Colorix
11-08-2010, 05:40 AM
Charlie - if someone takes a pix of a painting that you made
without your permission ... ?
:} Ed

No problem with that. They're welcome to a pic of the glare on the glass, a pic that will be too dark anyway as the white mat will decide the exposure. :D

Really truly, no problem at all with that. After all, I post my paintings all over the internet, and on my site. *Everybody* knows how to download a photo from the net. Makes little sense to me to object to someone taking a pic of fuzzy glary paintings on a wall. It is that balance between accessibility (customer downloading pic to look at while they decide if they're to buy or not, showing to friends/spouses = marketing), and protecting copyrights (hey, I'm famous, one of my pics have been stolen by the 'factory' copyists in a country in the far east!). I have quite a number of paintings that have new homes, and I have no control over who shoots pix of them.

Though, I am with Don, I'd rather have them buy postcards. Well, the actual *painting* would be best, of course.

I'd object a lot to copyright violations, and take legal action. And I'd definitely ask people to not take pics if it is not allowed in the venue.

I've taken pics of a show (asked first, got permission) just as a memory jogger of what was in it, some framing ideas, *hanging* ideas, and to figure out how important series was to the jury. And, to show friends I was there, it was nice, go and see it!

And thank you all for explaining and making it more clear. I think it *is* a cultural question. Here, it is allowed to take pictures of other people's gardens and houses, as long as you stand outside the fence/hedge, for example. It is allowed to use photos and paintings of people you've shot (photographically) or sketched in public places.

Kathryn Wilson
11-08-2010, 07:52 AM
I understand your concern Ed - ask first before taking photos.

On the other hand, I agree with Charlie - the photo would be of no use for reproduction. If they were looking for ideas to copy, that would be a no-no.

So, I guess your next step would be to express your concerns to the show committee and maybe they will take steps to prominently display the ruling on this at their next show.

the drover's dog
11-08-2010, 08:15 AM
I'm with you Charlie.

Can't see any sense in getting hot under the collar aboutt a fuzzy image snapped with a hand held camera. Tripod and special diffuse lighting is another matter and I would object to that unless it was for promotional purposes and sanctioned by organizers and artist.

Works covered by glass are hopeless to photograph anyway. I know, I just tried to do a photographic record of our art society's latest show for our archives. And yes, I gave myself permission as I ran the thing. Had to delete most of the pics I took and I didn't use a flash because the venue had excellent natural light. That natural light reflected back beautifully into my camera lens from glass and from varnished oils. Took lots of nice pics of myself reflected in the art too.

If they are going to copy anything they can just trawl through hundreds of artist's sites on the web and pinch pics from there. If you don't want your work copied (probably ridiculously badly), then don't exhibit and don't post photos of it on the internet.

Not worth getting your knickers in a knot over it.

Another platitude but more polite:
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
(I pinched that quotation. No idea who said that first but whoever said it, is probably long, long dead and copyright expired).:D

Dale

Lisa Fiore
11-08-2010, 09:12 AM
I agree with Charlie, also.

I currently have paintings hanging in two local shows in public spaces. It would be absolutely impossible to police who might come in with a camera and photograph the work. Although I'm uncomfortable with this, the risk/possibility of it happening is a part of putting my art "out there" for the public to see.

allydoodle
11-08-2010, 09:38 AM
I definitely understand that posting our paintings on the internet puts them out there, and available for copying, etc. That is the peril of the internet, something we just have to accept. It's part of the process of getting your work out there and seen. You can't keep your art in a closet and expect exposure at the same time - you have to take the good with the bad. (Maybe I don't like it, but I do accept it as part of the process.)

I guess when a sign is prominently displayed stating no cameras allowed, and not photos of artwork allowed, then I expect that to be honored, and when it is not, then I have a problem with it. If a club feels that is their policy, then they need to be clear about it at every venue. Ed, I guess maybe your art association needs to discuss this for future venues, to decide how to handle it.

If artwork is hanging in a public display (restraunt, winery, etc. not an art gallery), you have no control over what happens, and you certainly cannot police it. I don't worry about it.

As an aside, the music industry frowns upon people recording at performances, and states that cameras and video equipment not be brought into the venue. I guess no cameras at art exhibits would be a similar request, and not unreasonable (at least in my opinion).

Judibelle
11-08-2010, 09:58 AM
Interesting subject....Our Art League has a Facebook page, and one member traditionally takes pictures of the winners of our shows, and puts them on the Facebook page. But he also takes pics of people at the receptions, which are included on the Page.
I dont think we have a rule about people taking pics of others' works....
Judi

DAK723
11-08-2010, 10:08 AM
One thing to keep in mind while posting your art on the internet. While we can not control who might download our artwork, it is always good to keep the pixels low - such as the 800 pixel limit here on WC. An 800 pixel image copied and reproduced will only produce a good print that is 5.33 inches across (printed at 150 pixels per inch).

That is one of the differences between work copied from the net and copied by someone with a camera. Some digital cameras now have 15 or more megapixels, making reproductions that are 30" x 20" quite possible at the same 150 pixels per inch.

Don

Potoma
11-08-2010, 10:54 AM
Hey, that's one benefit of using glass that's not museum glass! Pictures don't come out so well.

That said, I don't expect the purpose is to reproduce electronically as much as inspirationally.

In my blog, I remove the 'click to' image, so the small one on the blog doesn't lead anyplace. I am shocked at blogs and online galleries which click to very large images.

RiJoRi
11-08-2010, 11:41 AM
Meandering thoughts:

Technically, the person taking the photograph is making a copy, which should fall under the copyright laws. Could you put a small card with a copyright notice in the corner of the picture? This way there's no "Oh! I didn't realize!" defense.

It's probably possible -- at least for me, the Electronics Technician -- to set up a circuit to flash a strobe out at the person a short time after they've used a strobe to copy your work. And to get really nasty, have a voice siren that announces "Copyright violator! Copyright violator! "

Of course, I could just stand behind the person, and say in my best basso profundo Darth Vader imitation, "You do not want to do that!"

Back to reality....

--Rich

PeggyB
11-08-2010, 01:04 PM
I'm with Charlie, Dale, Lisa, and anyone else who believes this just isn't something worth the time or effort to become overly concerned. If someone can copy my work via a grainy/glare so be it. If they sell that work, then the universe probably has a plan for them of which I'm not aware. As for copying my "idea" well I'm of the opinion there really are no new "ideas" in the art world. Everything we paint is a "copy" of something, and the technique we use is more than likely one we learned from someone else or saw in a museum or art book. There are some currently well known "master" pastel workshop instrutors who have faithful followers, and it is easy to know from whom those people are learning just by looking at their finished work. It isnt exactly like the "master", but it often is a very close imitation.

Peggy

Orchid Lady
11-08-2010, 01:39 PM
Just so we're clear about what the Federal Copyright law protects---it protects the actual image in an artwork, not the "idea" behind it. No "ideas" can be protected by copyright, whether it's artwork or trademark or whatever.

Colorix
11-08-2010, 02:25 PM
Ideas are extremely tricky, and if we are talking about the motif... well... let's see: I'd like to paint a reclining lady who is too poor to afford clothes -- ooops already made, by Ingres, Rubens, Manet. A landscape, then, what about a meandering stream with a little cottage... oh, no? Done already? Hm, what about three pears in a row, backlit with...? Darn. Hey, I know what to do, I'll take a hammer to my old glasses, crush the glass, and then paint what I see-- Oh, Picasso, you say? What is a poor artist to do, then? Poor, hm, (! idea !) I can put canvas on the floor and *pour* paint-- what, no, my name's not Charlie Pollock, what are you talking--- Ah, I see. It's hopless, I'll crawl into a cave and to pass time I'll draw extinct animals on the walls using only dirt and a piece of coal from my camp-fire-- Aaaarrrghhhh!!

sketchZ1ol
11-08-2010, 02:42 PM
hello
i've read all the posts and will respond
i did not mean to merely provoke
there is a deeper issue involved, imo

for one, intellectual property rights in industry/science is a very hot issue
the legal thrashing may become significant to/overlap copyright

thx to everyone posting

:} Ed

Kathryn Wilson
11-09-2010, 08:30 AM
Ideas are extremely tricky, and if we are talking about the motif... well... let's see: I'd like to paint a reclining lady who is too poor to afford clothes -- ooops already made, by Ingres, Rubens, Manet. A landscape, then, what about a meandering stream with a little cottage... oh, no? Done already? Hm, what about three pears in a row, backlit with...? Darn. Hey, I know what to do, I'll take a hammer to my old glasses, crush the glass, and then paint what I see-- Oh, Picasso, you say? What is a poor artist to do, then? Poor, hm, (! idea !) I can put canvas on the floor and *pour* paint-- what, no, my name's not Charlie Pollock, what are you talking--- Ah, I see. It's hopless, I'll crawl into a cave and to pass time I'll draw extinct animals on the walls using only dirt and a piece of coal from my camp-fire-- Aaaarrrghhhh!!


Too funny for words, Charlie - and so true. ;)

And how many times have we all worked from the same photo right here on the Pastel Forum and then come up with 25 different versions? It's all in the interpretation.

I reiterate - a clarification from your art group on photos being taken at the reception would be in order. After that, who will be there to police people taking photos?

DAK723
11-09-2010, 11:22 AM
I reiterate - a clarification from your art group on photos being taken at the reception would be in order. After that, who will be there to police people taking photos?
Good point! Once the reception is over and the show goes on unmonitored, who knows what goes on! I'm just happy if they don't steal my painting! My ideas or photos taken of my work, I don't really worry about. Like in most other things, we just have to hope that people will be ethical. Unless we are famous, it is unlikely that we will be seeing unauthorized reproductions of our work being sold on ebay!

Now that this topic has come up, I am considering talking to those in charge at my art club. Perhaps a small sign could be put up that says - "Please, do not take photos of the artwork. Instead, you may want to contact the artist to see if prints are available. Thank you."

Something like that...


Don

allydoodle
11-09-2010, 04:08 PM
DAK723 said:
Good point! Once the reception is over and the show goes on unmonitored, who knows what goes on! I'm just happy if they don't steal my painting!

!!! :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: !!!

Don,

That's scary! At my art club, we always have 2-3 people 'sitting' for the duration of the show, rotating every few hours. A schedule is worked out beforehand, and everyone shows up at their appointed time. The show is always on weekends, and everyone is required to volunteer to help, either for the hanging committee, sitting, or breakdown. It works well for us. We never leave our artwork unattended. Are your shows left open and unmonitored?

Kathryn Wilson
11-09-2010, 04:46 PM
hmmmm .... most of the shows I participate in are month-long shows. Paintings are hung until the next show is due to be hung.

*Deirdre*
11-09-2010, 04:59 PM
DAK723 said:


!!! :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: !!!

Don,

That's scary! At my art club, we always have 2-3 people 'sitting' for the duration of the show, rotating every few hours. A schedule is worked out beforehand, and everyone shows up at their appointed time. The show is always on weekends, and everyone is required to volunteer to help, either for the hanging committee, sitting, or breakdown. It works well for us. We never leave our artwork unattended. Are your shows left open and unmonitored?
Same with us...we also hang signs on every stand and wall....Photographing artwork is prohibited!

allydoodle
11-09-2010, 05:05 PM
hmmmm .... most of the shows I participate in are month-long shows. Paintings are hung until the next show is due to be hung.

I am talking about an art club I belong to. What we typically do is book a venue, usually a local arboretum, for a weekend. We set up on Friday morning, and show for Saturday and Sunday, and break down at 4pm on Sunday. It's not too bad, as we have over 100 members. We seem to always be able to book members to sit for 2 hour sessions, 6 hours total per day. Somehow, it works. The other shows I participate in seem to either be other art clubs, guilds or councils, with similiar guidelines, or galleries and wineries, which always have someone there. Even if I hang a painting in a restaurant, there is always someone there. I've never run into an art show where I've left a painting and the building was open with no one there. I guess things are done differently depending on where you are?

DAK723
11-09-2010, 06:29 PM
That's scary! At my art club, we always have 2-3 people 'sitting' for the duration of the show, rotating every few hours. A schedule is worked out beforehand, and everyone shows up at their appointed time. The show is always on weekends, and everyone is required to volunteer to help, either for the hanging committee, sitting, or breakdown. It works well for us. We never leave our artwork unattended. Are your shows left open and unmonitored?

Well, not that scary. Our main month-long show every year is held in a Barnes and Noble bookstore, in a "community" room, where they also hold discussion groups and poetry readings. So, anyone trying to steal a painting would be somewhat suspicious as I am sure store employees are looking out for shoplifters. We do hold another show that is only a few days long in a room in the town hall. For this show we do have 2 or 3 art club members sitting and observing (and hopefully taking sales!) at all times.

Don

sketchZ1ol
11-10-2010, 10:54 AM
hello
quick note/thought :
Rich - did use the DV voice
the look i got was - you must think you're talking to someone who cares
i should have taken a phonecam pix of her taking the picture(s) and told her i was going to put it on the internet :evil:

:} Ed

sketchZ1ol
11-10-2010, 02:55 PM
hello
Charlie -
Skol ! i like your sense of humour :lol:

let's follow your outline with a different palette/context :

your door is open/unlocked
someone walks in and picks a few of your coats from the coat tree/closet
has a big drink or two from your best liquor
helps themselves to your foodstock
( i won't go near the Pollack reference )

you walk in on this, and say, " excuse me, but what are you doing? "
and the person grunts, and strolls away
wearing a $ 3K wardrobe

right now, there's only two reasons that would be acceptable :
the person makes large private donations to the art center
the person is an heir of the family that gave the property to the town
with the condition that it shall be used and maintained as an art center forever

:} Ed

Dcam
11-10-2010, 03:52 PM
Great thread and so many opinions. I've had two openings recently and I am trying to imagine.........Ok, here I am drinking my wine and cramming a crab puff in my mouth listening in secret to people talking about my paintings....ok so far. A woman comes around and starts snapping pictures of the pieces including mine (ribbon winners or not).
Oh yeah! I might get a little concerned; and at every opening, the gallery administration is there, so I would go RIGHT to that administrator and ask what is going on. I would need to know for sure.
great thread ED.
Derek

ironbrush
11-10-2010, 10:13 PM
Hmmmmm... food for thought indeed. Taking a photo of a piece of artwork is probably somewhat, I imagine..."complimentary" of sorts. In my humble opinion... I agree with Ed, Deborah and Don. If it is an original work I think I'd be equally flattered and PO'd at the same time. You never know what people will do with the photo. If they are selling it to a magazine why wouldn't you expect to get some kind of residual from it's use. It's the same reason pro athletes "sell" their autographs and likeness. The unfortunate by-product of a commercial society trying to get rich quick.
To me, it is rude to take a photo without the permission of the artist who is standing right there. If this person was with the show or a publication (news media)... she should have had an ID or something displayed and indicated why she wanted to take the photo prior to the actual act of doing so.

Steven

Colorix
11-11-2010, 09:44 AM
To Ed:

Don't tell anyone, but I find it hard to take Reveration of Art too seriously. :D

A little logical, or rethorical, problem with your scenario, it is shifting the issue to another realm. Though I could name the guy, we all have one of those amongst our acquaintances... :rolleyes:.

Should be:

your door is open/unlocked
someone walks in and takes a photo of a few of your coats from the coat tree/closet
shoots a photo or two of your best liquor (an a'bunadh, btw, can't count a young Lagavullin, the Speyside is young too, and the Tomatin is just a standard one, as is the Jura.)
helps themselves to a photo your foodstock... etc.

That'd be trespassing, but it wouldn't stick if I was having an Open Studio, and an important bit is if the door is left unlocked, then I wouldn't have taken precautions and it probably wouldn't stick in a court of law.

I get upset when the photo of my coat is of the one I designed and sewed myself, and I then find a coat exactly like it in a designer boutique's display window on Expensive Street downtown, or at ebay for that matter.

No joke (promise): I do understand the *feeling*, the emotional reaction, of the picture taker being perceived as a thief.



hello
Charlie -
Skol ! i like your sense of humour :lol:

let's follow your outline with a different palette/context :

your door is open/unlocked
someone walks in and picks a few of your coats from the coat tree/closet
has a big drink or two from your best liquor
helps themselves to your foodstock
( i won't go near the Pollack reference )

(snipped)

:} Ed

bnoonan
11-11-2010, 10:52 AM
This is so funny.... I went from being appalled that someone would photograph my work (I put up a sign in my studio for art walks) and yet.... I have the photos on the internet. I can't possibly know what they do behind my back. I guess I have to trust they will go out and do what they do. Sad but true.


All that said, I do say something if I catch them and ask them to delete the picture.

As for photographing my coat... hmm... knock yourself out! it's covered with pastel dust typically.

I highly recommend leaving out your pastel box with all the yummy colors. It seems to be more of a draw than my artwork at times.:(


Oh and if you are serving the good alcohol... I'm going to your openings!!!:D

Barb

sketchZ1ol
11-11-2010, 02:43 PM
hello
Charlie - appreciate your acuity :)
you describe the coat which you made yourself :
that does reflect my concern about
how such behavior i saw can discourage creativity ...
seems a part of me clings to naivete ...

Derek - thx for your comment
your background as a teacher in the educational system
may have faced this question from some students

Barbara - 'what's behind your back' -
isn't that a shame ...

:} Ed

Talley
11-12-2010, 11:57 AM
This has been an interesting discussion. I've been surprised by the ferocity of the opinions.

I've never taken pictures of artwork or shown any artwork so I don't really have a dog in this hunt. But a nearby gallery has an annual show of local landscapes that I particularly enjoy. This gallery also has a sign "no flash pictures," which to me implies that nonflash pictures are okay. I had never even considered taking pictures until I saw that sign.

I didn't take any pictures. But the aspect of this show that always intrigues me is how some artists really capture the sense of place. While I recognize locations in many of the paintings there are some that just bring more than recognition to their work - what is it? the light? the color? And it occurred to me how nice it would be to have some pictures of those works to study at leisure and compare to other similar landscapes to try and understand how the painting elicits those feelings. And when there have been cards or other copies for sales, I have bought those.

Like others here, I'm not a copyright lawyer. Talk about a morass. But it's my understanding that it's not the making of a copy - a photo or whatever - but what use that copy is put to. The distribution and publication of the copy, whether for profit or not, is what triggers the potential copyright infringement. Taking a picture of Charlie'e exquisitely designed and hand made coat isn't an infringement, it's the knockoff copy appearing for sale that's the problem, as I understand it.

People seem to be saying that the taking of a picture presumes the intention to use the copy in some nefarious way. I would have thought that the internet would be a much better source of copies for these purposes.

Given the strong reactions here by exhibiting artists, I think I'll continue to not take any pictures.

Colorix
11-12-2010, 12:11 PM
Hi Kate, thanks, you definitely got the 'coat' right!

Oh, I'd say the discussion is *passionate*! (And I have to clean the house, so I rather procrastinate with a discussion... :-)

Talley
11-12-2010, 12:21 PM
And I have to clean the house, so I rather procrastinate with a discussion.

Me too!

And you're right "passionate" is a better description than ferocious.

Katherine T
11-15-2010, 06:05 AM
What an interesting discussion!

I thought you might like to hear the perspective of somebody who photographs exhibitions.

The first thing to note is that there is a copyright exemption for reviews of copyright protected work which I don't think anybody has mentioned as yet.

The photographs I take are within the context of reviews of the exhibitions of national art societies, major art competitions and major exhibitions in London (eg at the National Portrait Gallery and Royal Academy).

I have permission from the galleries concerned to photograph the work.

The way it works is as follows:
Most national art societies and art competitions now include a clause within the conditions of entry which relate to the use of images for promoting the exhibition. Effectively that means that the photographer has no need to ask indidual artists for their permission as that has already been given when they signed up to enter the show.
In any case I always work with the galleries where I photograph. They know why I want to photograph artwork, how I work in terms of the images produced and what the output looks like. I've now been doing this for a few years and the galleries are very happy with the results.
Very occasionally at major exhibitions in the big museums I'm asked not to photograph certain works. For example, at the Van Gogh show at the RA earlier this year there were a huge number of works on display of which a tiny number could not be photographed.
I photograph the exhibitions - prizewinning works, wall shots etc. I take many more photographs than I need because you can't tell until you've got them back home which are going to be the best ones for a review.
The images are processed so that there is no question of the copy being used for commercial profit. Generally speaking they are saved for use on the web @60dpi and no larger than 550 pixels longest dimension. Some of the galleries have very specific requirements and for those I work within their requirements
the images are posted within the context of a review on my blog (see signature line)
group shots are not credited to individual artists as the intention is to give a sense of the exhibition
all single images used are credited to a named artist and a link is provided to that artist's website if I can find it
other artists who are mentioned (but no image) also get a credit and a link to their website - where it can be found - in the reviewIn general, the response to the photographing of exhibitions is positive abd pretty much as follows:
the galleries are very pleased about it as it extends their marketing and reach to new audiences who may then go to the exhibition
sales of artwork - I kid you not!
appreciation from the officers of a number of national art societies - who recognise that it boosts the profile of the exhibition. Many now make a point of sending me invites to the PV!
much appreciation from artists who cannot get to see the exhibition but would love to enter it. The photographs tell them a huge amount about what sort of work is accepted, how big it is and how it's framed. This is all information which cannot be found out except by visiting the exhibition
people entering exhibitions the next year as a result of reading the review - and winning prizes! That's happened more than a few times now and the monetary worth of some of the prizes have been very significant (eg 000s).To be honest, the only people I've found who are resistant to photography are the smaller art societies who often do not understand about the purpose of photography within the context of reviews.

I can understand why you might be concerned by people who might use the photographs to copy and sell artwork - and obviously that is reprehensible.

However there are other legitimate uses of photography which can bring benefits to numerous artists without infringing on the income or rights of the artists whose work has been photographed.

The bottom line is that if you enter your work for an exhibition with a national art society or a major art competition you need to check the conditions of entry. You will now very often find that people can photograph your work. Most of the time you have no need to be worried as those who photograph work in exhibitions for reviews do so in a professional manner and present images likewise.

Colorix
11-15-2010, 07:15 AM
Katherine, thank you for this 'inside scoop'. Right, nobody's mentioned copyright regulations, maybe because it is a tricky area. I take it that the review exemption you mention is part of the international copyright agreement between nations. Very good to know, thanks!

sketchZ1ol
11-22-2010, 05:14 PM
hello
Katherine, if you are looking in,
my deepest thanks for your input.
Professional !

part of the dilemma, it would seem,
is to find some way for artists and the general public
to come together with some sense of mutual respect and understanding on a local level

after speaking to the pixer/woman, i did speak to
the organizer of the show who was present ( and a board member )
and i don't want to go hollywood on them
but the reaction was that it's not a big deal
for anyone to take pixs

that's how they run their show
( and their sales are dismal )

so it's a two edged sword :
you'll get exposure, and community contact
in the way that the art association keeps themself going

one concern i do have is that if i want to enter my piece
in another competion which stipulates -
published images are not accepted
and my painting is on the Net because of some pixer ... ?
just too complicated, and discouraging

:} Ed