Total Art Soul - for artists

Cathy wrote:
I would always ask, unless it was a place/landscape, in which case, anyone can go there and take the same shot.

So you rate the photographer's input in researching the area, selecting the location, time of day, lighting, framing and composition of no value?

Not at all. I don't paint landscapes but if I did, then I would never copy it religiously anyway so the time of day, lighting, framing and composition of the photographer would really have no bearing on the final image. I guess it just depends on how faithfully an artist wanted to copy the photo.

How do you stop people from painting the same landscape that's in your photo? How do you know they've not gone there and taken the same shot? If it's a public place, it's very difficult to define this. As a painter, if you want to paint a public place of interest and use photos as reference material, are you going to be able to tell if it's taken from your photo or not? Unless they're a photo realistic painter, it will always look different.

Also, as a photographer yourself, would you not wish someone to ask your permission and for you to be given credit? Are you saying you would not give your permission?

Cathy wrote:
...Also, as a photographer yourself, would you not wish someone to ask your permission and for you to be given credit? ....

yes, which you've just said you would not do! hence my objection

I said that I did ask for permission and I would.

In relation to public places, all I said was that if I was going to paint a public place, I would never copy it faithfully anyway and since it's a public place, I probably would not ask (if I was ever so inclined to paint such a picture). Like I also said, the lighting, framing and composition would never be the same.

I could also put this another way. If I paint a tomato, are you going to know which tomato I painted? Only if I copied his photo exactly with the same lighting, composition etc. If I copy the same tomato, put it in a different setting and then add different lighting, would he still know it was his tomato?

So in those circumstances, do we have to ask for permission of the photographer?

If we use photographs as references to produce our own individual works of art, I cannot understand why there could be an objection.

Also, if I see a photo of a public place and I think, well that would make a nice painting. I take out my camera, go and take the same shot, same angle, similar lighting etc. Then I do my painting which will look almost identical to the 1st photo I saw but will in fact have been copied from my photo, what then?

Do you need 'artistic license' to get 'artistic copyright' ?

Cathy wrote:

...
So in those circumstances, do we have to ask for permission of the photographer?
...
If all you are interested in is the minimum you legally need to do to avoid getting sued, probably not.

However, if you want to acknowledge the inspiration behind the painting, whether its identical or not, then you might want to ask. That you might be able to go to the same place, and take a similar photograph doesn't change the fact that it was seeing the initial photograph that was the inspiration, however different the final painting might be.