Someone basing their paintings on a photographer's photos - your thoughts?

[AfroKen]

I'm a relatively new photographer in many respects, so there's so many things that I haven't thought through yet.

Eleven Shadows Travels: Death Valley 2009-2010

A friend of a friend sent the above link, my photos of Death Valley, around. One of her friends is a painter, and was interested in painting several paintings of them.

Now, I don't know whether she is a commercial painter or what she is going to do with them or whether she is simply going to paint them for her own enjoyment.

Assuming that she is a commercial painter or is using this in a commercial manner, what are some points to consider? Are there articles or anything on this sort of thing? What should I consider? This is a totally new area that I've never once encountered. Your thoughtful responses are greatly appreciated. Thanks!

P.S. And just to be clear, I'm not looking at anything other than something that is fairly typical and FAIR for everyone, and am not looking to soak someone for money.

 

[NateWagner]

double post... you don't need to post the same thing in multiple areas on here.

 

[AfroKen]

Thanks. I try not to cross-post in general, but the other forum only had 16 people viewing, and was hoping for an answer relatively quickly, so I "broke the guidelines" this time!! I just posted this in two places anyway, here and the other forum.

 

[WimFoto]

Assuming that she is a commercial painter or is using this in a commercial manner, what are some points to consider? Are there articles or anything on this sort of thing? What should I consider?

i don't know if there are articles on this sort of thing. i'd say let her go ahead and paint your pictures and feel good that someone likes your work enough to use it in her art.

 

[AfroKen]

Assuming that she is a commercial painter or is using this in a commercial manner, what are some points to consider? Are there articles or anything on this sort of thing? What should I consider?

i don't know if there are articles on this sort of thing. i'd say let her go ahead and paint your pictures and feel good that someone likes your work enough to use it in her art.

That's actually my first inclination, but since I really don't know about this stuff, although were it for commercial purposes, some sort of I don't know what, whether it's credit or what. When I bring up these sorts of things, someone almost always seems to bring up an angle that I didn't initially consider, or brings up an important point. And that's kinda what I'm fishing for! Thank you very much for your opinion. Greatly appreciated.

 

[saahild]

Well if she has asked for your permission to use the pictures and you give her permission without condition she can really do what she likes with it.

However out of curtesy it is likey that she would atleast give you credit.

Although that said I don't think it is asking too much for atleast some recognition if she is making monitary gain out of something that you have originally created, and therefore have creative rights over.

 

[GFreg]

Dang that is a tricky situation. I would definitely ask her what her intentions are regarding the paintings she will be producing. If she intends to sell them then you may even be able to work out some sort of packaged deal with her. The painting and the photo together might be a neat way to sell them. I know you said you aren't looking to squeeze any money out of anybody but if the opportunity to sell your prints is there, go for it.

I can't speak in a legal manner about the subject. I am not sure how paintings of copyrighted photos would work in that sense. Technically wouldn't it be her artistic work even though it is based on your photo? Or she would only have to change a small detail and then it would be her artistic work.

Interesting dilemma you have on your hands. I would like to know how this pans out.

 

[AfroKen]

Well if she has asked for your permission to use the pictures and you give her permission without condition she can really do what she likes with it.

However out of curtesy it is likey that she would atleast give you credit.

Although that said I don't think it is asking too much for atleast some recognition if she is making monitary gain out of something that you have originally created, and therefore have creative rights over.

Agreed on all counts, and thanks for the responses, saahild and everyone!

Just to clarify, I haven't responded yet, so I haven't given any permission for anything. I felt that if we began a discussion here, I'd get to consider numerous points of view, have a cool discussion, probably get to consider points of view that I hadn't considered or make me re-think things, and increase my chance of giving a fair, even-handed, thoughtful response.

 

[Dominantly]

I wonder if there would be anything a photographer could do, if someone used their photo as inspiration, if it was of a landscape anyone cold go and see.

I mean if you took a photo of a mountain range, and I wanted to paint that same range and used your photo to make sure I recreated it correctly, I don't see how the photographer could have any say. If it was something I couldn't have walked up and seen myself, something a photographer created themselves, then I could see it.

 

[HikinMike]

I was approached (via e-mail) a few years ago to be a photo reference for one of my landscape photos. He first said we could trade, my file for a painting. I thought it was a fair trade. He wanted the hi resolution file. I wasn't comfortable with giving over my file. I decided to do it. I set him an e-mail stating you had my permission to trade my file for a painting, but if you decide not to use it, I want $50 for my time. He never replied and never got the file either.

 

[KmH]

Thanks. I try not to cross-post in general, but the other forum only had 16 people viewing, and was hoping for an answer relatively quickly, so I "broke the guidelines" this time!! I just posted this in two places anyway, here and the other forum.

:lmao:

Yes officer, I was speeding, but it's ok because I was in a hurry. :thumbup:

 

[AfroKen]

Thanks. I try not to cross-post in general, but the other forum only had 16 people viewing, and was hoping for an answer relatively quickly, so I "broke the guidelines" this time!! I just posted this in two places anyway, here and the other forum.

:lmao:

Yes officer, I was speeding, but it's ok because I was in a hurry. :thumbup:

Yes, that's pretty much it!!!

 

[anthonydamario]

I love your shots of the Badwater Basin and the Devil's Golf Course. Sorry to be off topic haha.

 

[NateWagner]

To my knowledge, and I could be mistaken. but I believe she would be interfering on your copyright if she basically did an exact duplication of the image, or a portion of the image. However, if she added to it, or took it from a different perspective etc. then enough of that makes it so that she is no longer breaking copyright.

In any event, I suppose you could try to make a contract with her, perhaps do something such that if she makes prints you get a portion of the sale. Honestly though, I do believe that it would be relatively easy for her to change it enough that even though she might be basing it on what you did, it would become her own work, and you would have no right to any sort of a claim (not sure of this though... looking it up now).

 

[AfroKen]

Here's something a friend just sent me. I don't know where she got it from, but I think it adds to our conversation:

"In general, if done as part of an art class for instruction and critique, students can usually paint a copy of a photo or other image, provided it is done for the class, and kept as a single copy for personal use only, and not re-sold, or have any other copies made. That's a provision of Fair Use.

I get asked this question quite frequently. If someone wants to do a painting of my photo, and it is not for a class, I tell them that they require a derivative use license. (Just putting the image into a different medium has no effect on making something "not a derivative".) Derivative means derived from... photo to painting, photo to sculpture, photo to jello & whipped cream collage, it doesn't matter. If someone can tell that image A was derived in any recognizable form from image B, then that is a derivative use.

I'll ask a person what their plans are, is it for personal use, or do they plan on making multiple copies or selling the painting. Also, Ill ask if the image will ever be displayed at a place where the public is required to pay admission to view the artwork. Those are variables that are taken into account when determining the commercial value of a derivative use license. If it's for personal use only, I may charge a basic research / personal use license fee of $50.00 and offer to send them a full screen watermarked scan to help them paint. If they plan on selling the work, I may charge a few hundred dollars, plus charge a royalty percentage on each print sold, determined by the number to be produced, and how much they'll be sold for."

~~~~~~~~

Also, apologies again for the cross-posting. Someone on the other thread took umbrage, and I'm certainly not here to piss people off, so even if I need an answer quickly, I won't cross-post again! Thanks!

~~~~~~~~~

My GENERAL take on this before posting this was that if it were for personal or otherwise non-commercial use, I'd respond by basically saying, "Hey, I'm extremely flattered that you find my images inspirational! Thank you for asking! Please go for it!" It's the commercial stuff that I'm not sure about, and just wanted something fair. The above quote seems to address it fairly.