The people on this forum make me sick

[BillM]

Imitation is the highest form of flattery ????

 

[imagemaker46]

It's tough enough just trying to get good at it without adding pressure on yourself. Just do what you can, shoot a lot, and if you see something that looks good, try and copy it, learn from what you see.

Scott has got it right, this is exactly what I do. I even have a Album on Flickr called "Plagiarism" where I post direct copies of other peoples photos. Doing this has taught me a lot, don't forget to look at the Exif details so you know where to start.

Have fun
Ray

That's great, for you. The person you're plagiarizing probably wants to kick your ass.

I think you completely missed the point of what I was saying. They say that everything has already been shot, so anything else that's shot is going to be a copy. When I'm working around other photographers, they shoot from one position, leave go to another, right after the previous spot has a photographer standing in shooting the same angle. We joke about shots that we have just done "I just shot that, so you can't" Everyone learns from someone else, that's how it works. That's how teachers teach.

I've had some of my setups copied exactly and published by other photographers, I wasn't pissed, I learned the setups from someone else, and for the type of shoot, it was the best setup. I can't lay claim to being the original photographer.

 

[Buckster]

"Good artists copy; Great artists steal."

I just "stole" that quote.

I've also "stolen" the idea to make/imitate photos of: water, fruit and vegetable drop/splashes, untold numbers of various objects, many common landscapes, portraits of people, zoo animals, and probably a lot of other stuff I'm not recalling at the moment.

Back when I played guitar and sang, I "stole" and imitated many, many well-known songs written and performed by others that I'd heard on the radio and often bought the recordings of. Coincidentally, I've noticed over the years that this happens a lot. People call them "covers", and some are considered quite good, even classic, in their own right.

Here's another quote I'm happy to "steal":

"Imitation is the greatest form of flattery."

Artists who don't put their work out there for others to see and hear claiming it's because they're afraid it will be copied aren't artists; They're wannabes using a lame excuse to keep from being ridiculed for making crap that they don't want others to see or hear.

One last "stolen" quote:

"Life sucks. Get a helmet."

I don't mine sharing and learning. But when someone purposely goes to a not normally shot location and purposely tries to copy your photo that is something else.

No, it's really not something else. It's not any different than them going to a well known location and purposely trying to imitate a well-known photo (which is often why that location is well-known in the first place).

By your way of thinking, no photos should ever be shown, especially not great ones, because someone might try to make one like them, and that's just a load of BS, pure and simple.

you don't care because it doesn't effect you probably with the type of photography you do. Put it in the perspective of your client taking your photos and not paying you and you might get it.. In this case, someone is basically taking your shot because they are taking your idea and copying it. We may just have to agree to disagree here. Come take a walk with me around the city or where i shoot sometime and you might "get it" on why someone would be upset going through a ton of b.s. to get a photo only to have it copied. If i shot little kids and photoshopped them i wouldn't care either. Don't even apply. There isn't much original about that to start with. Not like you are out hunting photos.

Oh, please. Call yourself a waaaambulance and quit whining.

First, you have no idea the width and breadth of my photographic endeavors, but here's a clue: It's not at all limited to taking photos of kids and photoshopping them. Making and selling portraits is just one facet of my photography.

I've been and still do go "out hunting photos", as I have for over 40 years. The big difference from what I can see is that I don't come back with snapshots that I'd be ashamed to show anyone, so I cover it by saying "they're so awesome you can't see them because you might want to emulate them." Just the opposite, I show them AND sell them.

You're losing NOTHING by someone liking your photo enough to want to emulate it, any more than any other photographer on the planet making a photo that others like so much that they want to emulate it. Most photographers would regard that as the highest form of flattery.

For a so-called photographer to say to the world, "I'm not going to show you my photos because they're SO AWESOME that you'd like them SO MUCH that you'd want to emulate them" is nothing but pure bull in my opinion.

 

[Forkie]

I really don't understand the elitist, secretive attitude of some photographers. It's as if they are trying to stop anyone else from becoming photographers through some fear that the "student" will become better than the "master" and they'll be knocked out of the race.

I reckon it reveals a low self esteem, insecurity and a lack of confidence in their own ideas and abilities. If a photographer's idea and execution is done well and their style solid, it will stands on its own two feet no matter how many people emulate it.

 

[Overread16 4]

MODERATOR NOTICE

Everyone take a few moments to have a breather and lets not get too heated here! We can debate this in a sane sensible manner without getting in a strop or a fight.

 

[bribrius]

"Good artists copy; Great artists steal."

I just "stole" that quote.

I've also "stolen" the idea to make/imitate photos of: water, fruit and vegetable drop/splashes, untold numbers of various objects, many common landscapes, portraits of people, zoo animals, and probably a lot of other stuff I'm not recalling at the moment.

Back when I played guitar and sang, I "stole" and imitated many, many well-known songs written and performed by others that I'd heard on the radio and often bought the recordings of. Coincidentally, I've noticed over the years that this happens a lot. People call them "covers", and some are considered quite good, even classic, in their own right.

Here's another quote I'm happy to "steal":

"Imitation is the greatest form of flattery."

Artists who don't put their work out there for others to see and hear claiming it's because they're afraid it will be copied aren't artists; They're wannabes using a lame excuse to keep from being ridiculed for making crap that they don't want others to see or hear.

One last "stolen" quote:

"Life sucks. Get a helmet."

I don't mine sharing and learning. But when someone purposely goes to a not normally shot location and purposely tries to copy your photo that is something else.

No, it's really not something else. It's not any different than them going to a well known location and purposely trying to imitate a well-known photo (which is often why that location is well-known in the first place).

By your way of thinking, no photos should ever be shown, especially not great ones, because someone might try to make one like them, and that's just a load of BS, pure and simple.

you don't care because it doesn't effect you probably with the type of photography you do. Put it in the perspective of your client taking your photos and not paying you and you might get it.. In this case, someone is basically taking your shot because they are taking your idea and copying it. We may just have to agree to disagree here. Come take a walk with me around the city or where i shoot sometime and you might "get it" on why someone would be upset going through a ton of b.s. to get a photo only to have it copied. If i shot little kids and photoshopped them i wouldn't care either. Don't even apply. There isn't much original about that to start with. Not like you are out hunting photos.

i would like to see just what you have shot that is so terribly original and displays such photographic Majesty that you are deathly afraid of it being stolen or copied.
wherever it is you are shooting at, i am pretty sure it has been done before. and whoever sees your photo has to go to the same place, and deal with the same "B.S" as you to take the same shot.
is the fear that someone will take the same shot as you? or that they will do a better job at it?

i don't care if they do a better job or a worse job. I care because it is my damn photo. Now if they want to go shoot a lighthouse or river pic or some generic thing i shot that everyone else shoots they can have at it. It isn't uncommon for photographers to run two or three separate types of photos because of stuff like this. Two or three categories, separate files, books. Call it what you will. I know another photographer that does the same. one goes online, or general. one goes for immediate network (people you know), one is strictly personal. I follow that concept now.

You dont want people friggin with the work most important to you don't post it. And i think that is the best way to handle all this crap honestly. just get right out of it. My family and friends wil see photos this site will never see. Certain others will see photos that friends this site, or most family will never see. Vast majority places like 500px will never see as they wont go online i dont care if i sold one or not.. Some photos, no one will ever see. They are MINE. I just have to be more careful when i toss chit online as sometimes i lose track. In the case i referenced above, that photo was never suppose to go online. i wasn't paying enough attention and just uploading random chit. The other photographer i mentioned (x news photographer) is even more stringent than me. She separates things out like a friggn hawk on what goes online and who sees what. She has a entire decades portfolio no one will ever see and i only have caught a glimpse of.

 

[pixmedic]

"Good artists copy; Great artists steal."

I just "stole" that quote.

I've also "stolen" the idea to make/imitate photos of: water, fruit and vegetable drop/splashes, untold numbers of various objects, many common landscapes, portraits of people, zoo animals, and probably a lot of other stuff I'm not recalling at the moment.

Back when I played guitar and sang, I "stole" and imitated many, many well-known songs written and performed by others that I'd heard on the radio and often bought the recordings of. Coincidentally, I've noticed over the years that this happens a lot. People call them "covers", and some are considered quite good, even classic, in their own right.

Here's another quote I'm happy to "steal":

"Imitation is the greatest form of flattery."

Artists who don't put their work out there for others to see and hear claiming it's because they're afraid it will be copied aren't artists; They're wannabes using a lame excuse to keep from being ridiculed for making crap that they don't want others to see or hear.

One last "stolen" quote:

"Life sucks. Get a helmet."

I don't mine sharing and learning. But when someone purposely goes to a not normally shot location and purposely tries to copy your photo that is something else.

No, it's really not something else. It's not any different than them going to a well known location and purposely trying to imitate a well-known photo (which is often why that location is well-known in the first place).

By your way of thinking, no photos should ever be shown, especially not great ones, because someone might try to make one like them, and that's just a load of BS, pure and simple.

you don't care because it doesn't effect you probably with the type of photography you do. Put it in the perspective of your client taking your photos and not paying you and you might get it.. In this case, someone is basically taking your shot because they are taking your idea and copying it. We may just have to agree to disagree here. Come take a walk with me around the city or where i shoot sometime and you might "get it" on why someone would be upset going through a ton of b.s. to get a photo only to have it copied. If i shot little kids and photoshopped them i wouldn't care either. Don't even apply. There isn't much original about that to start with. Not like you are out hunting photos.

i would like to see just what you have shot that is so terribly original and displays such photographic Majesty that you are deathly afraid of it being stolen or copied.
wherever it is you are shooting at, i am pretty sure it has been done before. and whoever sees your photo has to go to the same place, and deal with the same "B.S" as you to take the same shot.
is the fear that someone will take the same shot as you? or that they will do a better job at it?

i don't care if they do a better job or a worse job. I care because it is my damn photo. Now if they want to go shoot a lighthouse or river pic or some generic thing i shot that everyone else shoots they can have at it. It isn't uncommon for photographers to run two or three separate types of photos because of stuff like this. Two or three categories, separate files, books. Call it what you will. I know another photographer that does the same. one goes online, or general. one goes for immediate network (people you know), one is strictly personal. I follow that concept now. You dont want people friggin with the work most important to you don't post it. And i think that is the best way to handle all this crap honestly. just get right out of it. My family and friends wil see photos this site will never see. Certain others will see photos that friends this site, or most family will never see. Vast majority places like 500px will never see as they wont go online i dont care if i sold one or not.. Some photos, no one will ever see. They are MINE. I just have to be more careful when i toss chit online as sometimes i lose track. In the case i referenced above, that photo was never suppose to go online. i wasn't paying enough attention and just uploading random chit. The other photographer i mentioned (x news photographer) is even more stringent than me. She separates things out like a friggn hawk on what goes online and who sees what. She has a entire decades portfolio no one will ever see and i only have caught a glimpse of.

so, when you take a shot and then realize that someone else did it before you....
will you delete your photo so your not "stealing" someone elses idea?

 

[Forkie]

i don't care if they do a better job or a worse job. I care because it is my damn photo. Now if they want to go shoot a lighthouse or river pic or some generic thing i shot that everyone else shoots they can have at it. It isn't uncommon for photographers to run two or three separate types of photos because of stuff like this. Two or three categories, separate files, books. Call it what you will. I know another photographer that does the same. one goes online, or general. one goes for immediate network (people you know), one is strictly personal. I follow that concept now.

You dont want people friggin with the work most important to you don't post it. And i think that is the best way to handle all this crap honestly. just get right out of it. My family and friends wil see photos this site will never see. Certain others will see photos that friends this site, or most family will never see. Vast majority places like 500px will never see as they wont go online i dont care if i sold one or not.. Some photos, no one will ever see. They are MINE. I just have to be more careful when i toss chit online as sometimes i lose track. In the case i referenced above, that photo was never suppose to go online. i wasn't paying enough attention and just uploading random chit. The other photographer i mentioned (x news photographer) is even more stringent than me. She separates things out like a friggn hawk on what goes online and who sees what. She has a entire decades portfolio no one will ever see and i only have caught a glimpse of.

You only own the photo you shot, not the one the next photographer shot. I don't understand the difference between someone else shooting a "generic" lighthouse that you already shot or shooting against a location you already shot with a different model in it. How do you get annoyed about one but not the other?

Are shots of lighthouses less valuable than ones with a person in them?

 

[Dave442]

Do like Amazon and patent the process of how you take your pictures.
Now I do remember my granddad showing me a photo he had taken, and then pulling out a spread he had pulled from a magazine and it was the shot that he went to shoot. His had his style, the similarity was the mountain in the background. Then he had another shot he had of an old mine and then showed me a recent (at the time 1970's) magazine shot of the same mine. So if your going to shoot in Colorado for seventy years your probably going to end up with shots from the same place as others have been or others are going to go where you have been.

 

[photoguy99]

Buckster, I agree with you.

 

[bribrius]

"Good artists copy; Great artists steal."

I just "stole" that quote.

I've also "stolen" the idea to make/imitate photos of: water, fruit and vegetable drop/splashes, untold numbers of various objects, many common landscapes, portraits of people, zoo animals, and probably a lot of other stuff I'm not recalling at the moment.

Back when I played guitar and sang, I "stole" and imitated many, many well-known songs written and performed by others that I'd heard on the radio and often bought the recordings of. Coincidentally, I've noticed over the years that this happens a lot. People call them "covers", and some are considered quite good, even classic, in their own right.

Here's another quote I'm happy to "steal":

"Imitation is the greatest form of flattery."

Artists who don't put their work out there for others to see and hear claiming it's because they're afraid it will be copied aren't artists; They're wannabes using a lame excuse to keep from being ridiculed for making crap that they don't want others to see or hear.

One last "stolen" quote:

"Life sucks. Get a helmet."

I don't mine sharing and learning. But when someone purposely goes to a not normally shot location and purposely tries to copy your photo that is something else.

No, it's really not something else. It's not any different than them going to a well known location and purposely trying to imitate a well-known photo (which is often why that location is well-known in the first place).

By your way of thinking, no photos should ever be shown, especially not great ones, because someone might try to make one like them, and that's just a load of BS, pure and simple.

you don't care because it doesn't effect you probably with the type of photography you do. Put it in the perspective of your client taking your photos and not paying you and you might get it.. In this case, someone is basically taking your shot because they are taking your idea and copying it. We may just have to agree to disagree here. Come take a walk with me around the city or where i shoot sometime and you might "get it" on why someone would be upset going through a ton of b.s. to get a photo only to have it copied. If i shot little kids and photoshopped them i wouldn't care either. Don't even apply. There isn't much original about that to start with. Not like you are out hunting photos.

Oh, please. Call yourself a waaaambulance and quit whining.

First, you have no idea the width and breadth of my photographic endeavors, but here's a clue: It's not at all limited to taking photos of kids and photoshopping them. Making and selling portraits is just one facet of my photography.

I've been and still do go "out hunting photos", as I have for over 40 years. The big difference from what I can see is that I don't come back with snapshots that I'd be ashamed to show anyone, so I cover it by saying "they're so awesome you can't see them because you might want to emulate them." Just the opposite, I show them AND sell them.

You're losing NOTHING by someone liking your photo enough to want to emulate it, any more than any other photographer on the planet making a photo that others like so much that they want to emulate it. Most photographers would regard that as the highest form of flattery.

For a so-called photographer to say to the world, "I'm not going to show you my photos because they're SO AWESOME that you'd like them SO MUCH that you'd want to emulate them" is nothing but pure bull in my opinion.

Missing the point. Nothing to do with awesome. Totally on the fact they are MINE. oh i show tons of photos. Depends on what it is. Difference is i post about anything, crap or not. And some are just flat out mine for me. I don't need pats on the backs or likes and "good job!" and don't really care what people think for the most part. If you post a photo people really like or you sell you probably care more. Since i primarily shoot for me, it primarily revolves around me. Some people need that social "good job! and care more what others think. I generally just don't. Take my own path. Ever notice some of the crap i post on here? Pretty obvious. i sure ain't out to impress anyone.

 

[snerd]

........... I reckon it reveals a low self esteem, insecurity and a lack of confidence in their own ideas and abilities.....

Pretty much.

 

[Buckster]

"Good artists copy; Great artists steal."

I just "stole" that quote.

I've also "stolen" the idea to make/imitate photos of: water, fruit and vegetable drop/splashes, untold numbers of various objects, many common landscapes, portraits of people, zoo animals, and probably a lot of other stuff I'm not recalling at the moment.

Back when I played guitar and sang, I "stole" and imitated many, many well-known songs written and performed by others that I'd heard on the radio and often bought the recordings of. Coincidentally, I've noticed over the years that this happens a lot. People call them "covers", and some are considered quite good, even classic, in their own right.

Here's another quote I'm happy to "steal":

"Imitation is the greatest form of flattery."

Artists who don't put their work out there for others to see and hear claiming it's because they're afraid it will be copied aren't artists; They're wannabes using a lame excuse to keep from being ridiculed for making crap that they don't want others to see or hear.

One last "stolen" quote:

"Life sucks. Get a helmet."

I don't mine sharing and learning. But when someone purposely goes to a not normally shot location and purposely tries to copy your photo that is something else.

No, it's really not something else. It's not any different than them going to a well known location and purposely trying to imitate a well-known photo (which is often why that location is well-known in the first place).

By your way of thinking, no photos should ever be shown, especially not great ones, because someone might try to make one like them, and that's just a load of BS, pure and simple.

you don't care because it doesn't effect you probably with the type of photography you do. Put it in the perspective of your client taking your photos and not paying you and you might get it.. In this case, someone is basically taking your shot because they are taking your idea and copying it. We may just have to agree to disagree here. Come take a walk with me around the city or where i shoot sometime and you might "get it" on why someone would be upset going through a ton of b.s. to get a photo only to have it copied. If i shot little kids and photoshopped them i wouldn't care either. Don't even apply. There isn't much original about that to start with. Not like you are out hunting photos.

Oh, please. Call yourself a waaaambulance and quit whining.

First, you have no idea the width and breadth of my photographic endeavors, but here's a clue: It's not at all limited to taking photos of kids and photoshopping them. Making and selling portraits is just one facet of my photography.

I've been and still do go "out hunting photos", as I have for over 40 years. The big difference from what I can see is that I don't come back with snapshots that I'd be ashamed to show anyone, so I cover it by saying "they're so awesome you can't see them because you might want to emulate them." Just the opposite, I show them AND sell them.

You're losing NOTHING by someone liking your photo enough to want to emulate it, any more than any other photographer on the planet making a photo that others like so much that they want to emulate it. Most photographers would regard that as the highest form of flattery.

For a so-called photographer to say to the world, "I'm not going to show you my photos because they're SO AWESOME that you'd like them SO MUCH that you'd want to emulate them" is nothing but pure bull in my opinion.

Missing the point. Nothing to do with awesome. Totally on the fact they are MINE. oh i show tons of photos. Depends on what it is. Difference is i post about anything, crap or not. And some are just flat out mine for me. I don't need pats on the backs or likes and "good job!" and don't really care what people think for the most part. If you post a photo people really like or you sell you probably care more. Since i primarily shoot for me, it primarily revolves around me. Some people need that social "good job! and care more what others think. I generally just don't. Take my own path. Ever notice some of the crap i post on here? Pretty obvious. i sure ain't out to impress anyone.

You specifically said that you don't and won't post them BECAUSE you don't want others to copy them, and when you accidentally DID post one and someone DID say thanks because they want to go there and emulate it, you freaked out and pulled it.

Your original premise over multiple posts made it clear: Ansel should have had a total "mine, mine, MIIIIINEEE!!!!" meltdown and pulled his work because others came along after him and shot Half Dome, inspired by the shots he took of it. After learning that lesson, he should have never showed any of his work again.

Now you're trying to ignore all that and say it's all just because you're only shooting them for your own eyes to see them - AND - at the same time, that you don't CARE that others see your work, even when it sucks.

Whatever works for you, man, but it makes no sense at all to me.

 

[Fudd]

The photos shared here push me into learning more. There isn't any reason why I can't be better at this hobby.

 

[bribrius]

Buckster, I agree with you.

i don't . i am in shock this is even a debate. If i say i don't like someone copying my photo it pretty much ends right there. It is my photo and my photography. This isn't a freakn democracy where everyone gets a vote on it. It isn't a group effort or "group think" and i wasn't asking for permission..