Paranoia: its just life
When Lin wrote her post on lighting yesterday, she said that it would probably cause a bit of a stir. It sure did.
The point that she was trying to make was that many photographers have their own unique "look" which often encompasses a particular lighting style, a personal signature if you will. She argued that others who create a direct copy of the original photographer's image with the same lighting and maybe an element or two's difference, are merely acting as photocopiers. She thought this was plagarism, and that it was wrong.
The responses seem to indicate that people think that I should accept the situation, stop being paranoid and learn some lighting. Ouch.
Let me put this to you. Is it really O.K. to see a shot you like posted to a blog or a portfolio site, sit down and work out the lighting, find a model, and shoot the same picture, with the same lighting and a similar pose, post it the following day as being yours, and then sell it and make money from it? It happens all the time, and I don't know of any photographer who likes it, unless they are one of the photocopiers.
The problem is that at one time the photographers were innovators, they had a style, be it posing or a lighting style, and for a while it would be their own style, unique to them. There were very few of them and photography was an expensive job, so the styles moved slowly. Now in the days of the internet, there are millions of photographers, they have the money to buy the kit and the time to study the pictures and work out how they were done, but they don't have the imagination to be an artist, so they copy what they see. Because there are more photocopiers than innovators, the value of innovation has been lost and now the majority, even those who should know better, think that this photocopying is normal and acceptable.
It's just another example of the moral bankruptcy of the modern world.
People think its O.K:
To download free music, music companies make too much money, sod the artist,
To download free films, the studios are money grabbers,
To download the text of a new book, its over priced,
It's O.K. to rip off any damn thing you like, if you can.
Moral bankruptcy.
Read it again.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Lin, from yesterday.
The point that she was trying to make was that many photographers have their own unique "look" which often encompasses a particular lighting style, a personal signature if you will. She argued that others who create a direct copy of the original photographer's image with the same lighting and maybe an element or two's difference, are merely acting as photocopiers. She thought this was plagarism, and that it was wrong.
The responses seem to indicate that people think that I should accept the situation, stop being paranoid and learn some lighting. Ouch.
Let me put this to you. Is it really O.K. to see a shot you like posted to a blog or a portfolio site, sit down and work out the lighting, find a model, and shoot the same picture, with the same lighting and a similar pose, post it the following day as being yours, and then sell it and make money from it? It happens all the time, and I don't know of any photographer who likes it, unless they are one of the photocopiers.
The problem is that at one time the photographers were innovators, they had a style, be it posing or a lighting style, and for a while it would be their own style, unique to them. There were very few of them and photography was an expensive job, so the styles moved slowly. Now in the days of the internet, there are millions of photographers, they have the money to buy the kit and the time to study the pictures and work out how they were done, but they don't have the imagination to be an artist, so they copy what they see. Because there are more photocopiers than innovators, the value of innovation has been lost and now the majority, even those who should know better, think that this photocopying is normal and acceptable.
It's just another example of the moral bankruptcy of the modern world.
People think its O.K:
To download free music, music companies make too much money, sod the artist,
To download free films, the studios are money grabbers,
To download the text of a new book, its over priced,
It's O.K. to rip off any damn thing you like, if you can.
Moral bankruptcy.
Read it again.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Lin, from yesterday.
posted by Richard at 12:58 PM
4 Comments:
Another example of moral bankruptcy.
When my wife arrived at work the other day, a member of the staff was showing everyone her wedding album--a wedding album in which every picture was watermarked "P R O O F (c)..." across the full width of the print. As it turns out, she had picked them up from the photographer, bought a cheap album from a local store, and filled it herself. She was delighted with her savings and not the least bit concerned with either the appearance or significance of that watermark.
Richard,
Let your work stand on its own legs…it will sink or float based on its own merit. If I worried that someone else will start using Large Breasted Mannequins in their photos..or Real Life Masks…I would go nuts. I suggest you do the same with the particularities of your photography… concentrate on your own work.. There will always be photographs that very strongly resemble the photographs of others, including the ones that we create..and the ones that others create. The photographic greats are great for a reason…and their work invaluable. They are the pioneers. We are the ones who follow.
For what its worth…myself….when I publish a photograph (or sell to a collector, gallery or museum)..it is out there for it’s future posterity. Any attempts by others to recreate an image in my likeness style are flattering…but they are not the originals. I am OK with that….I suggest piece of mind exists when you think along these lines as well.
Lastly, if we are so worried what others do..and fear that they may be “ripping off” our work….I suggest that perhaps deep down we may not have the confidence in our work to stand up to the rigors mentioned above. Not saying that this is YOU or ANYONE else...simply mentioning a possibility.
Here is what Helmut Newton said about Plagiarism
“ I have mixed feelings about those sorts of things. When I see it done by interesting young people, I think it's very valid. But when established photographers, people in there forties, copy me and get a lot of money, well, I find that to be very stupid.”
Helmut Newton
It seems that Mr. Newton (who I draw great inspiration from…but never intentionally try to copy or emulate…as that would be “stupid”) was not too concerned about plagiarism, and actually embraced those who were younger that copied him. He seems a bit annoyed by it being done by “established photographers” however…and their making a lot of $$ from copying his style. Until I we reach Mr. Newton’s prominence…perhaps we should not worry too much about these things.
bt
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
This, to me, sums up the issue SO well. Just because you CAN use techniques you know that in a certain combination will look exactly like someone else.. one of the "greats" or not.. doesn't mean you should, and claim it as yours.
Try it, learn from it? Sure. I think everyone does, in some way or another. But claim it as your own, and make a profit from the knowledge others have shared with you? No. As Lin said..it's just not nice!
But.. I'm also "only the model" (yes, that's just to irk Lin! ha!) so I'll stay out of the technical debates, for the most part. I hate just repeating what others have said anyway. It's a terribly unoriginal way to make one's point.
As for the images, yesterdays and todays.. I LOVE them both! They truly are what I see as "your" style...and Lin looks just STUNNING in both!
Wish they were MY images... but I'll stick with just wishing, thank you. And, enjoy looking at yours, over and over! ;)
Hugs to you both!
Well I won't go into this topic.. but again, love the picture!
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home