Home Member Services Content Areas Tools Info Center WC Partners Shop Help
Search for:

Welcome to the WetCanvas forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit our help center.

Go Back   WetCanvas > The Art Business Center > General Art Business
User Name
Register Mark Forums Read

Salute to our Partners
WC! Sponsors

Our Sponsors
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   Report Bad Post  
Old 11-22-2019, 07:49 PM
Harold Roth Harold Roth is offline
Pawtucket, RI
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,817
Hails from United States
Re: author rights

No, people just disagree with you.

For some reason this issue has become a hobby-horse with you that you keep bringing up. I don't know why. Personally, I have never felt any urge to copy others' work, so I don't get why anyone would want to, much less justify why they do it.

Last edited by Harold Roth : 11-22-2019 at 08:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17   Report Bad Post  
Old 11-22-2019, 10:49 PM
theBongolian's Avatar
theBongolian theBongolian is online now
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,685
Re: author rights

Originally Posted by Harold Roth
Personally, I have never felt any urge to copy others' work, so I don't get why anyone would want to, much less justify why they do it.

"urge to copy others' work" -you've never had that urge to copy so you don't understand, the night sweats, the ravenous angst when that copy fix is not satisfied, when your xerox machine breaks down and it's the middle of the night, your hands are shaking, you have that feeling in the pit of your stomach - that only ripping off other artists can satisfy (satire alert).

That 's why this discussion is pointless IMO. If you try to inject any nuanced perspective the high horses rear up and any other person with a different point of view is a thief a scoundrel,, immoral, a reprobate, void of any originality or ideas. Then the most egregious cases are sighted as examples that no one in their right mind would defend.

This, in all honesty, is far from being my hobby horse. The only reason I engage is when the first time poster gets plumed with virtuous righteousness to the point that they're afraid to look at a photo while they paint for fear that 4% of their PAINTING might be too similar to 2% of a photo. The law IS the law and that would make them not only a thief but open to reams of litigation.

I'm not encouraging anyone to break the law just trying to keep it real - but then I gots this insatiable urge to copy other artists' work. GOts to do it, you just don't understand.


Last edited by theBongolian : 11-22-2019 at 10:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18   Report Bad Post  
Old 11-23-2019, 06:06 AM
Harold Roth Harold Roth is offline
Pawtucket, RI
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,817
Hails from United States
Re: author rights

I don't see that the OP got attacked. I see that others posted what they had to say in response to the OP's question. They didn't agree with you. And now you are mocking people for it. Way to get people to ignore what you post.

Last edited by Harold Roth : 11-23-2019 at 06:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #19   Report Bad Post  
Old 11-23-2019, 08:56 AM
lambentLogic lambentLogic is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 115
Re: author rights

Things like sampling for collage have a different historical record of successful defense under the same laws from things like sampling for music. (Tends to be viewed more favorably for some reason, yet still winds up in court if someone objects to that use of what they did.)

But collage isn't exactly the concern here. Given you said 'many photos', I'm not sure what is, exactly, but just in case: Looking at a bunch of different photos to figure out how a horse works? You aren't copying a photo, you are accurately establishing how a horse works. Getting the details of something you want to paint correct doesn't (generally) mean you are copying the photo. If you look at 100 photos to figure out how to convey subsurface scattering, or a particular setup of lighting like light from below, and then use those on your piece, you aren't copying - you learned something.

I am, in fact, someone who likes to paint directly from (a single) photograph that someone else made. I don't really see the difference between feeling the urge to build some additional interpretations on a lovely photo someone else has taken and feeling the urge to capture a photo of something yourself and build on it later, except that the first gives you a link with someone else, and opens worlds you can't reach.

If you also want to use photographs like this: find photographs made available for your use by the photographer. The reference library here is. Public domain images are, and some of the images released into the public domain due to being government photographs are quite beautiful. Creative commons licenses are often used by photographers who'd love for you to use their work if you attribute them properly and/or also make your work usable under the same terms. You can often buy the privilege to use a copyrighted photograph in a painting from a photographer and they will enjoy the chance to collaborate.

At the end of the day keep in mind there's a fellow artist on the other side of that camera. Honor them without doing them harm or going against their legal rights and wishes.

(And understand that there might be some obscure legal clause you missed that reverts copyright on a work-for-hire to the original creator after 35 years and you might have to cease copying derivative works at that time; or that perhaps the license you had permission to use under was one that could be withdrawn at any time and they might change their mind.)

Disclaimer: I am a programmer and the open source movement has gone mainstream enough to be rather indispensable to my usual creative process. An amount of the ethos naturally carries over to my hobbies. Trying to figure out how the different open source licenses you are using interact can be ... fun ...

Last edited by lambentLogic : 11-23-2019 at 09:04 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #20   Report Bad Post  
Old 11-27-2019, 01:03 AM
EllenRipley's Avatar
EllenRipley EllenRipley is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 201
Re: author rights

Quite a discussion here! lol
I am painting a jaguar - the head is from one photo, the body from another and colors from another. As a whole position is changed.

Last edited by EllenRipley : 11-27-2019 at 01:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #21   Report Bad Post  
Old 12-16-2019, 07:33 PM
Cindy Schnackel's Avatar
Cindy Schnackel Cindy Schnackel is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 871
Hails from United States
Re: author rights

If it's recognizable as a copy, there's a risk the original owner could find out and object. Courts decide case by case, if someone sues, whether a use was infringing or not. There's no formula to make it handy to know if you've gone too far. I've found most photographers are generous with permission if you ask first.
Reply With Quote
  #22   Report Bad Post  
Old 12-18-2019, 04:09 PM
bartc's Avatar
bartc bartc is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 750
Hails from United States
Re: author rights

Copying was considered great homage in some cultures, and in many art teaching situations it's the main way to start on something or to learn a technique.

Ownership rights come in much later, but for those legally oriented and protective of their work, there's a couple of hundred years more or less of legal limits. And as anyone can read here and elsewhere, it can be somewhat murky at times.

I have no desire to copy. If I ever did it would be from one of my own photos, so it's not my issue. But EVERY artist is essentially "informed" by who and what came before as inspiration. So derivation is built into human learning, in art and much else. You won't escape some borrowing, even if it's unconscious and unintended, or even not quite totally recognizable.

Get permission if you can, and for certain if you are going to reproduce, publish or sell!

FWIW, people tend to attribute my painting style to Van Gogh. That's hugely flattering to me (not to him!), and a good test of eyesight in the bargain. None-the-less, I know damn well that I learned from his and other Impressionists' work. He copied Millet, himself! Nothing totally new under the sun.
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:52 AM.

© 2014 F+W All rights reserved.