Ethics: Copying a Photograph

[zulu42]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. We'll see if I can even pull it off without radio triggers.

 

[imagemaker46]

Just shoot it, no two pictures will ever be identical, light will never be the same twice, air, clouds, tree movement, humidity. Pictures may look the same and I've seen lots that look identical, but unless two photographers are standing in exactly the same spot that shoot at exactly the same split second, and two people standing in exactly the same spot not being possible. Can't happen.

 

[Bartcephus]

There comes a point when the re-creating is a duplication of the original product. If that is the case, then there might be an infringement. If it is merely using the same technique to capture a similar, but unique image, then probably not an infringement. Most if not all of us have used a camera to capture an image. Using the camera seemed implicit that we would take/create images with the device. Whether we use a photocopier such as commonly called a Xerox machine or a camera only pertains as to the methodology of securing the image. But if you set up the same image, by using the same or substantially the same subject manner and the same techniques, couldn''t that be found to be so similar as to be a copy? Perhaps an infringement upon the original image? But then we look at other techniques that we know by name for instance "Butterfly Lighting" to take a portrait. There are thousands of portraits that except for the variations in the subject's face, the images would be considered copies. Is that an infringement, I don't think many would consider those as copies. But let's say you apply a particular technique like the Dragan effect. Does that come closer to violating another's work?