Is this a common response when asking permission to use a photo for reference? - Page 3

Raineyoung · #31 05-22-2012, 02:18 PM

I'm new here, so please bear with me. I have run into a related but quite different situation and am completely confused about what to do. I am a "mature" art student in a continuing education program. Learning to paint as I near retirement has been so satisfying, and I have very recently begun to try soft pastels (after two 5-hour workshops). I practice on my own when I can, have tried still life, used my own photos, and very recently I used a reference photo I found on the internet - the composition was lovely but there was little colour and almost no shadows, and I have never tried a seascape before (prairie girl). I wanted to see if I could make a colourful, vibrant version of the photo. I thought it turned out pretty well although maybe amateurish (not surprising) - and then I asked permission from the photographer to post my version - with full acknowledgement and credit to him, and a link to his website, on my "Flickr" page with assurance that I would not make it public without his permission. His response was immediate and furious. He accuses me of copyright infringement because I painted first and asked after, although I did not claim it to be an "original" work, and do not expect or hope to profit in any way by it. It's personal and will never be public. It's a student's practice work. I don't think I broke the law, or the spirit of the law, but the part of his response that has me most upset is his demand that I send him my painting so the he "can see that it is destroyed." Is this reasonable? Must I send him my painting to destroy it? I'm feeling battered and bullied by this "professional", just for being honest.

Davkin · #32 05-22-2012, 02:57 PM

Tell him he can go "pound sand". As long as you don't make it public he has no claim.

Ruthie57 · #33 05-22-2012, 03:22 PM

Raine, don't publish it anywhere, Flickr or anything. Then do what David said! Do not send him your painting to destroy!

Raineyoung · #34 05-22-2012, 05:03 PM

Thank you both, David and Ruth, for your replies and advice. It has not been and will never be made public. I haven't replied to his demand yet, I was so shocked, but I don't intend to send him the painting. I included an image of it when I requested his permission, so that he could see how I had interpreted the photo and see the differences. I can't imagine why he would want to destroy it (unless he thinks it's that awful). It seemed like an irrational demand and I am glad of the moral support! :-)

sketchZ1ol · #35 05-23-2012, 02:54 PM

hello
a bit of a rude awakening .

posting your painting on flickr , here , or any publicly viewed place ,
( and i recognize that you implied that you have not )
as compared to a copy mailed to a friend/relative ,
gets into murky water .

the fact that you made the painting before you asked permission
puts you at the disadvantage .

a way out might be to take a photo of your painting and
recycle the original surface in a way that is useful for you .
= the painting has been destroyed by you in a manner of your choosing ,
and inform the pixer of that .

if that's not to his/her liking ,
your rebuttal is that you are concerned that he/she will
manipulate your image to their profit ...

hopefully , lessons will be accepted all around , and time will move on .

Ed :}

Colorix · #36 05-23-2012, 03:24 PM

I second Ed, you can't send your painting to the rude person as he may use your image to his profit. Hah!

And I wouldn't show it on the net, anywhere.

And I think you did the right thing by asking for permission. Even if it was after the fact of painting it. So many don't do that.

robertsloan2 · #37 05-23-2012, 05:22 PM

I had a friendlier reaction when I accidentally used a photo on DeviantART before contacting the photographer - I did it, then looked up the file to see what the photographer's name was to send her notice that I painted it. I offered to give her the painting beacuse I had forgotten to ask permission. She declined and accepted my apology.

I would retain it in my sketchbook under that kind of demand - no way would I send my art out to be destroyed! That is an unreasonable demand. If he's the only person who saw the digital image, I'd destroy the digital image but not the actual painting and inform him of that - without telling him where the painting is.

People sometimes get burned and then they'll take it out on the next person who asks or apologizes. But if you don't sell or display it and it was just an exercise for you, then keep it in your sketchbook. The same thing has come up in relation to fan fiction and authors' copyrights, what's in your diary is your own.

One thing about RIL photos versus photos just posted on WetCanvas. I always ask if a photo is posted for Weekend Drawing Event or a monthly challenge, since the photographer may not want it used again after the date of the challenge. Or if they just posted it in a chat thread. Most times they're willing to share but I always ask anyway.

I developed a system for tracking it after the peacock photo disaster. Now when I download a photo for use, I put "no permission" in the file name until I hear back from the photographer. With their username or name and where I got it. Once I get permission I either download again or Save As with Permission in the file name.

This makes it a lot easier to keep track of the thousands of cool references in my hard drive, a small proportion of which are from public sources that are likely not to give permission, like National Geographic.

There's a level of skill where you can use photo references without violating copyright at all. Johannes Vloothuis goes into this a lot in the Painting Landscapes From Photos course - in essence you're changing the shapes of everything and rearranging it like a stage set while using the photo mostly as a source of details and accuracy for type of subject (type of trees, rocks, etc. or how water falls.)

The better I get at that, the more I do it whether I need to or not, the less need I'll have to worry about sources for things like "what an explosion looks like with billowing black smoke." It also helps to use not one but a good number of references so that no one of them is predominant and there's no major similarities to the photographer's work other than the basic identity of teh subject.

I could use a photo of a leopard from National Geographic for leopard anatomy details, but use the pose from one of my cat gestures of Ari and a different leopard's face from a different source and take the tree from something else and then get very loose on the spots, simplifying them from the photo accuracy. This would eliminate "that was the particular leopard I photographed in Kenya" problem since spotted and striped cats' markings are unique to the individual. They'd have no case. But it might take that many references to be sure I gave no case. It's not something I'd recommend to a beginner or anyone who's still working at being able to copy accurately.

In fact, that's the perfect example because I've made a particular study of cats. I wouldn't quite dare do that with a horse yet since I'm still learning equine anatomy, or a dog.

Raineyoung · #38 05-23-2012, 05:33 PM

Thank you Ed for the idea to re-use the surface! It's on a half sheet of Wallis "Belgian Mist" paper and I am positive I can take off most if not all the original painting with a bit of elbow grease and a few kneaded erasers! I didn't do an underpainting (learned about those in the Soft Pastel forums here only in the past few hours, and saved the threads as favourites to return to later!) so I think it shouldn't be too difficult, and I'll still have great paper to work on, I think Wallis is pretty tough. I'll take a day or two to admire my work (:-)) and then remind myself that it's neither perfect nor precious!
Charlie, my biggest regret is that I didn't ask first! It honestly didn't occur to me until I finished it and thought it had turned out well enough to show to my Flickr friends, and that's when I asked out of what I believed was honest sincerity and consideration for his copyright.
Yes, it was a hard lesson to learn, especially since I have decided to take Ed's idea and "destroy" it myself and re-use the surface. (A great idea, I think.) At least whatever I paint over it will have an interesting history!
BTW, I am SO happy to have found Wet Canvas! I have to go back to work tomorrow after a few days off, but the last day and a half since I found it has been a pure joy and pleasure to explore! I won't be able to stay away after this!

Raineyoung · #39 05-23-2012, 05:53 PM

Hi Robert, thank you for your informative reply - I think I must have been writing when you posted it! I think it is an unreasonable demand, but I like Ed's idea more with every passing second. Whenever I look at the painting, which I was quite pleased with, considering my skill level, it just makes me a little less satisfied. It just reminds me of the things he said. I actually did use a second reference photo, but only for the brilliant colours of the houses in the seaside village and nothing else, not a single shape or line, so I'm pretty sure that's all right. I didn't ask that photographer if I could use the red, blue and yellow of the houses in his photo....how much trouble am in for that now, I wonder! I have learned my lesson, never fear! I will never, ever, use someone else's photo for practice or any reason without getting permission first, in case I decide to share it at a later time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robertsloan2

I had a friendlier reaction when I accidentally used a photo on DeviantART before contacting the photographer - I did it, then looked up the file to see what the photographer's name was to send her notice that I painted it. I offered to give her the painting beacuse I had forgotten to ask permission. She declined and accepted my apology.

I would retain it in my sketchbook under that kind of demand - no way would I send my art out to be destroyed! That is an unreasonable demand. If he's the only person who saw the digital image, I'd destroy the digital image but not the actual painting and inform him of that - without telling him where the painting is.

People sometimes get burned and then they'll take it out on the next person who asks or apologizes. But if you don't sell or display it and it was just an exercise for you, then keep it in your sketchbook. The same thing has come up in relation to fan fiction and authors' copyrights, what's in your diary is your own.

One thing about RIL photos versus photos just posted on WetCanvas. I always ask if a photo is posted for Weekend Drawing Event or a monthly challenge, since the photographer may not want it used again after the date of the challenge. Or if they just posted it in a chat thread. Most times they're willing to share but I always ask anyway.

I developed a system for tracking it after the peacock photo disaster. Now when I download a photo for use, I put "no permission" in the file name until I hear back from the photographer. With their username or name and where I got it. Once I get permission I either download again or Save As with Permission in the file name.

This makes it a lot easier to keep track of the thousands of cool references in my hard drive, a small proportion of which are from public sources that are likely not to give permission, like National Geographic.

There's a level of skill where you can use photo references without violating copyright at all. Johannes Vloothuis goes into this a lot in the Painting Landscapes From Photos course - in essence you're changing the shapes of everything and rearranging it like a stage set while using the photo mostly as a source of details and accuracy for type of subject (type of trees, rocks, etc. or how water falls.)

The better I get at that, the more I do it whether I need to or not, the less need I'll have to worry about sources for things like "what an explosion looks like with billowing black smoke." It also helps to use not one but a good number of references so that no one of them is predominant and there's no major similarities to the photographer's work other than the basic identity of teh subject.

I could use a photo of a leopard from National Geographic for leopard anatomy details, but use the pose from one of my cat gestures of Ari and a different leopard's face from a different source and take the tree from something else and then get very loose on the spots, simplifying them from the photo accuracy. This would eliminate "that was the particular leopard I photographed in Kenya" problem since spotted and striped cats' markings are unique to the individual. They'd have no case. But it might take that many references to be sure I gave no case. It's not something I'd recommend to a beginner or anyone who's still working at being able to copy accurately.

In fact, that's the perfect example because I've made a particular study of cats. I wouldn't quite dare do that with a horse yet since I'm still learning equine anatomy, or a dog.

Davkin · #40 05-23-2012, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raineyoung

I have learned my lesson, never fear! I will never, ever, use someone else's photo for practice or any reason without getting permission first, in case I decide to share it at a later time.

That's not the lesson to learn here. Go ahead and use any reference material you want for practice, don't worry about it, but don't share or sell it either. Don't let this experience scare you off of doing what is perfectly acceptable under fair use laws. People paint copies of paintings made by living famous artists all the time, but they do it for their own personal educational benefit and don't display them publicly. If that's all you're doing there is absolutely no need for getting permission and risking another bad experience because some jerk is feeling overly defensive.

David

sealart · #41 05-23-2012, 06:25 PM

the first line was fine, the rest I felt was snotty if not bordering on being downright rude. but it is his problem not yours.

and as for that guy demanding that you send your work to him... how do you know that he isn't going to use your work for his benefit.

Raineyoung · #42 05-23-2012, 07:04 PM

It hasn't really scared me off, just made me think about it. It's just as easy to ask for permission before the fact as after, as I did. And the thing is, I just couldn't know in advance if I'd want to share it (post it, give it away) until it was finished. Even when it's for educational use (and maybe especially when it's been a learning experience) students want to share their little successes. So, it's hard to say I'd never want to share it...and it's much easier to ask first, now that I know how prickly some photographers can be, and avoid the disappointment of having done the work and not being able to share it.
Then again, I just found out about the Wet Canvas Reference Image Library, and the monthly Spotlights - what a happy discovery they are! So this could just be a moot point!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davkin

That's not the lesson to learn here. Go ahead and use any reference material you want for practice, don't worry about it, but don't share or sell it either. Don't let this experience scare you off of doing what is perfectly acceptable under fair use laws. People paint copies of paintings made by living famous artists all the time, but they do it for their own personal educational benefit and don't display them publicly. If that's all you're doing there is absolutely no need for getting permission and risking another bad experience because some jerk is feeling overly defensive.

David

***Deirdre*** · #43 05-23-2012, 07:27 PM

You have found the answer to getting good photo refs!

The WetCanvas Image Reference Library is superb...and what's more...If you can't actually find the ref you need, in there...you can ASK in the Library requests Section...and there are so many kind photographers who do there level best to answer your request with a photo or selection, I'm always amazed at the response.

AND they are copyright free from the IRL

...but I always feel that if they took the trouble to upload it to the library for us to use...it's only fair/polite to acknowledge their input by mentioning who shot the photo...

Raineyoung · #44 05-23-2012, 08:29 PM

Absolutely right Deirdre! I wouldn't use someone else's photo without gratefully crediting the original source.
I haven't had a chance to do more than take a quick glance at some of the photos in the IRL yet but I am so excited to do that when I have more time. It sounds like a magical universe of images!
I have few pretty decent photos that I would love to share there, too, as soon as I find out how to do that. I am so glad I found Wet Canvas!

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Deirdre*

You have found the answer to getting good photo refs!

The WetCanvas Image Reference Library is superb...and what's more...If you can't actually find the ref you need, in there...you can ASK in the Library requests Section...and there are so many kind photographers who do there level best to answer your request with a photo or selection, I'm always amazed at the response.

AND they are copyright free from the IRL

...but I always feel that if they took the trouble to upload it to the library for us to use...it's only fair/polite to acknowledge their input by mentioning who shot the photo...

Salute to our Partners