RE: Photomatic Contest - Digital Blending Entry - Don't trust anyone ;)
Very confusing. I followed the discussion of Raoul Poenar and the other (semi-)pros who are dead-set against using other poeple's work. But then they encourage you to use three or FIVE other photos and MESSING with the original. Hmmm... I think there is a place for giving bandwidth to great photos found after much searching, in order to illustrate perfectly your article (plus referring to forgotten blogs elsewhere on the web). And you know what I think about creating some kind of Steemit-stockpile for the convenience of writers (and at their request possibly).
I'm telling you because I fear the others will bite my head off! I love your title warning me not to trust anyone, and I think you might also have some ideas about digital manipulation. How far can one go?
I am not sure how I feel about looking and loving landscapes that turn out not to exist at all. I feel like I'm losing touch with reality enough already.
Then again, great PS exercise! I am tempted to give it a go! Only where are the original photos you used (not on the page you mention).
Well, I guess they were against using other people work without permission ;-)
I'm not sure if I got your idea correct ... you want to create some kind of free-to-use-for-post-illustration images library? No problem, just give info that you make it available on Creative Commons license :D
And the files are (yes, a bit hidden) in the photomatic post. You can click "HERE" somewhere in the text. Or use this link -> https://wetransfer.com/downloads/d855d9d4afb51325028c422d29dcf26e20180304163237/f616fe568e0a778744c599b1f10e72ce20180304163237/a4364c
But you can't get permission from people that simply, (especially not from blogs from 2001), when you want to illustrate your daily post...
Not free to use. But some kind of (token) payment to use (with restriction on steemit). Permission, after all, won't feed your children....
Thanks for the link. Quite a lot of work to make a choice: the first threshold to the competition. It challenges a totally different artistic side. Seeing these photos makes me realise again that you are a talented man to imagine a landscape like the one you have!
Hey @sukhasanasister! There is one thing using other's people work for your own benefits and a totally different thing using a given set of images, images that I explicitly gave my permission to be used and manipulated for this contest.
Regarding photo manipulations, as you can see I am not against that. You, as a photographer manipulate the scene when you decide what to leave in your image. All the great photographers used to manipulate their images. Ansel Adams used dodge and burn to highlight parts of the image. I agree, it's one thing using dodge and burn and a totally different thing creating an image from nothing but that's why it's called digital art .
My point on stealing photos remains the same.
P.S Sorry you couldn't find the link to the files. I should have made it more visible.
.... but it's not stealing.... it's borrowing and drawing fresh attention to old photos or adding on to their story. It's lip-service, when we begin to look at only the cases where photos are at least credited. No brainer. But you don't even want that without prior permission. It's just not feasible .
I suppose you are worried that somebody else is making the money you wanted? Or are you afraid to be taken out of context or associated with something controversial(that would worry me as writer)?
I still believe we should be moving towards relaxing copyright. Where has the joy in sharing and caring gone? Until they do something about pinterest etc I think there is no stopping this diluting of keeping a photo special (and thereby worth something).
The idea of asking permission is nice if you work for a magazine or paper, but in social media it's nonsense. How can we share the news without showing the pictures of the warzones (can't go there myself). If I wait for permission it won't be news anymore.
Whatever of yours would get posted here by a well-meaning blogger who found your photo on the net somewhere, dug up from some obscure corner should flatter you and can't economically harm you. The neurosis of people making easy money off your blood, sweat and tears is lost on me. Might be happening, but it is also not happening. Maybe each case deserves to be looked at independently if you suggest we monitor these things this closely.
Very interesting to hear about Ansel Adams. This marks him as an artist and not a nature photographer. It's becoming clearer to me where the professional divide lies.
Here's something that happened to me just last year.
I'm taking part in various photo competitions (FIAP, GPU, etc). Last year , after submitting my entry I received an email saying that my entry was flagged because I violated copyright and have stolen an image from an artist that already submitted that image.
Naturally I replied to that email saying that the image was mine and I have the raw file to prove it. We exchanged emails back an forth for about a week until eventually they gave me credit and disqualified the other entry.
The thing is that by the time all of this was over, the period for submissions was over and I've missed my chance.
So, when I say I am against taking photos without permission I know what I'm talking about.
I strongly disagree with you on the matter of long forgotten photos that are brought to life by someone else.
The copyright laws state that an image is the propriety of the author from the moment it was taken and lasts 70 years if I'm not mistaking.
When you say relaxing copyright I say encourage theft. Every image that is posted means something to the author.
If he/she earns something from it it is entirely their business.
I agree that this kind of practices can't be stopped but some of us really care about their work and want to be asked before someone takes our image and tries to earn something from it.
At the beginning of the post you said ".... but it's not stealing.... it's borrowing".
Think of it like this way. What if someone broke into your house and borrowed your TV.
Theft is theft anyway you look at it.
I don't mind if someone takes my image and uses it as a background for his phone/PC, Facebook cover or even prints it(I will take that as a compliment). I mind when someone takes an image, claims it as his own and then tries to earn from it.
Ah, now I understand your concern. I didn't realise something so ridiculous could happen. Who does such crazy stuff?! Sorry for your experience, which is TOTALLY unacceptable. I was only thinking of the way I use photos to illustrate my story. I never claim them as my own, I couldn't imagine who would. What is there to gain from that. I don't understand (but know it happens).
I think most people however would not feel right about such fraud as you speak of, and when they infringe the law they are more like children or kleptomaniacs, which in my book falls under mitigating circumstances. I also know most people don't agree with me on that one. I think I must conclude that some of us will then have to post blankly or take up drawing. I know at least 10 people who do NOT have a smart phone (but do use internet). That's what I meant by thinking in different leagues of criminal activity. I'm still getting used to the fact that money plays a role here on Steemit... Good luck with your super creative competition!
Thanks so much! :) Maybe you'll join the contest :)