I discuss my preference for using one's own photos, or transforming the source until it is unrecognizable, a jumping off point for creativity. Yes, I know about Photo-realism and Appropriationism. Both entail philosophical differences from the usage I'm discussing. The direct use of a news photo may violate a copyright.
Please check out a current case in an article from the New York Times, "Artist Sues The A.P. Over Obama Image". This preemptive case brought by artist Shepard Fairey against the Associated Press should be worth following.
Posts
1 comment:
Okay, okay I don't want to violate anyone's copyright in using a photo reference for a watercolor painting that I may produce. So, how much of a change do I have to make to my painting from the original photo to be "legal" and not infringe on anyone's photo rights?
Also, I like to paint "iconic" images, e.g. Maroon Bells in Aspen, well lots of people beside me have done almost identical photos. Can they come back at me and say I violated their copyright?
Post a Comment