The people on this forum make me sick

[yellow ant]

Shoot, shoot and shoot some more. I know I'm not good but occasionally I get lucky because I'm prepared to get lucky! Having a basic technical understanding of the camera and how it captures light lets you get the shot when it happens. If you're a person with artistic ability and creativity you can create the scene and then capture it but some of us are destined to remain photojournalists forever. If "it" happens I can get the shot, assuming I recognize "it"......................

Flickr DennyBeall s Photostream

Taking lots of photos in all different kinds of situations then? Those that are not naturally very good conditions will test you. That which does not kill us ...

 

[JTPhotography]

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..

This.

Folks, we're not talking about a lighting set up, or a technique, we're talking about a specific location or angle or perspective that makes that shot, as far as you know, totally unique. I think it would only make sense to and piss of the landscape/nature photographer that works a specific area, at least that is the perspective I am speaking from.

Every landscape shot is totally unique, like it or not.

You can't just go there at the same time of day, even if the guy who originally shot it told you what that time was or you read the EXIF info and knew he had his camera's clock set correctly. You'd have to shoot it at the same time of day on the same day of the year, and then what are the chances the weather will be the same? You can't just go a few minutes earlier so that the sun will be in the same place in the sky, because it's only there again a year later. It doesn't follow the same path in the sky day after day. And what of the vegetation and the state of the bridge a year later? No change at all? Really?

Ansel spent literally YEARS hiking in Yosemite watching and waiting for the right conditions to get the shots he wanted.

I've revisited the same locations many times, waiting, watching and looking for the right conditions to get a shot that I'd deem a "keeper". If someone else wants to do that, good on them. It's no skin off my nose, and takes NOTHING from what I did to get the shot, nor does it detract in any way from the pride I have when I look at my photo of it.

I really just don't get it. I've never before encountered photographers who are so proud of something they shot that they refuse to show it to any other photographers, for fear that the other photographers will like it so much that they'll want to emulate it.

I never said every landscape shot is not totally unique. I never said that I don't show my work for fear of other photographer's emulating it. If you're going to debate, quote, and respond to me directly, then address what I said, not what you think I said.

I'm addressing the conversation as a whole, and your part in it. You said that the original photographer shot it in a way that made that location totally unique. I agree, but not for the same reason that you and Brian apparently do.

I agree because, as I explained, EVERY photo of that location MUST BE unique. There is no choice in the matter.

THAT SAID, any other photograph taken of that location by any other photographer is not infringing on the original photographers "UNIQUE" photograph. It CAN'T. It is itself unique because it MUST BE.

I thought my response made that thought clear. Does this one?

No, I didn't say anything about the original photographer making it unique.

You said:

we're talking about a specific location or angle or perspective that makes that shot, as far as you know, totally unique

Who took that shot from, "a specific location or angle or perspective that makes that shot, as far as you know, totally unique"? You now clarify that it's not the original photographer, so who?

I'm talking specifically about people who see me shooting somewhere then shoot from that exact location, something they would have never had they not seen me do it

You don't know that's true, and you certainly can't prove it. They might have had the idea before you, and you just happened to get there first. Maybe it's one of their favorite shooting spots, a spot they've visited and shot from many times. Are you a mind reader?

, or people who see a photo, figure out where it was taken and go try and replicate it.

We've been talking about that. Half Dome is a classic example of it. Why is it wrong for people to go shoot photos of Half Dome?

I also said there is a ton of gray area here, some cases are more obvious that others. I don't see your shooting half dome as wrong at all.

Why not? Someone else shot it first. Thousands, maybe millions, shot it before I did. And someone was FIRST - why doesn't that FIRST shooter "OWN" Half Dome? Why is that any different from any other location that YOU shot first? Or that Brian shot first? Or that I shot first? Or that anyone else shot first? Explain it to me please. What is it about you or Brian that I should respect, while we all flip the first photographer of Half Dome the bird?

If you were shooting half dome with a certain cool rock you found while you were exploring and someone saw you, stopped and waited for you to finish, then shot it, that would be wrong IMO.

Why? What's the difference between shooting it with that perspective, and just shooting it the way the original Half Dome shooter shot it? Why do you have to respect the way I shot it and not do the same, but you don't have to respect the way the first Half Dome shooter shot it and respect them and not do the same?

Explain it to me.

Man you're wayyyy overthinking this. It is a matter of right and wrong. Plagiarism is wrong, the more specific it is, the more wrong it is. If you think it is ok to plagiarize, then I can't change your mind.

 

[photoguy99]

Can someone please explain depth of field to me?

TIA.

 

[Ray Hines]

Wow!! Was it something I said? Sorry Yellow Ant if this thread has been hijacked it wasn't my intention.

Buckster, and others I'm with you on this, and thanks for your support. My intention when copying another persons shot was to learn from it. Maybe a technique, maybe just a perspective. I have one shot of my local pier and as I said in the description of it I had previously only ever managed to get snap shot photos of it. By copying another photo I learnt how to look at it in a different way and get a better shot. Some of my indoor shots taught me how to use different lighting techniques, by comparing my shot with the one I was copying I could tell if I was doing things correctly.

I said that there are no original photos. Maybe I should have been more specific. If I take a photo of a raindrop in a puddle, it's not original. If I take a photo of a young mother walking through dropped leaves in autumn, it's not original. If I take a photo of a graffiti covered wall, it's not original. It will be a very lucky tog who gets to take a truly original photo. Most of us, me included, will NEVER take an original photo. I'll carry on taking inspiration from others, and learning from them.

 

[bribrius]

Every landscape shot is totally unique, like it or not.

You can't just go there at the same time of day, even if the guy who originally shot it told you what that time was or you read the EXIF info and knew he had his camera's clock set correctly. You'd have to shoot it at the same time of day on the same day of the year, and then what are the chances the weather will be the same? You can't just go a few minutes earlier so that the sun will be in the same place in the sky, because it's only there again a year later. It doesn't follow the same path in the sky day after day. And what of the vegetation and the state of the bridge a year later? No change at all? Really?

Ansel spent literally YEARS hiking in Yosemite watching and waiting for the right conditions to get the shots he wanted.

I've revisited the same locations many times, waiting, watching and looking for the right conditions to get a shot that I'd deem a "keeper". If someone else wants to do that, good on them. It's no skin off my nose, and takes NOTHING from what I did to get the shot, nor does it detract in any way from the pride I have when I look at my photo of it.

I really just don't get it. I've never before encountered photographers who are so proud of something they shot that they refuse to show it to any other photographers, for fear that the other photographers will like it so much that they'll want to emulate it.

They aren't putting the work in and coming up with their own ideas. what is their not to get? You would think at least a little originality and efforts could be expected. I am all for the sharing and learning thing but at some point it is closer to photographer welfare. Not like they are earning it. And no, they can't EXACTLY replicate your image. But they aren't even putting the work in to deserve to come even close to it.

Because they didn't walk the same distance you did to get to it? Yeah, they did. So much for the work part.

Because they didn't think to go shoot that location? Yeah, they did. Oh, the reason YOU thought it up is different than the reason THEY thought it up, so only yours counts, eh?

So then, ANY shot you've EVER seen in your lifetime that might inspire you to go get a similar shot, like say, a landscape with a bridge out in the middle of nowhere, is off limits to you, because someone else thought it up first, right? Or does that only apply to SPECIFIC locations that YOU want to claim as "YOURS"?

So, tell us, what EXACTLY was it that made you want to go shoot whatever it was that is so unique to YOUR brain, and nobody else's? Seeing photos of landscapes with bridges out in the middle of nowhere didn't inspire you to go find and shoot a bridge out in the middle of nowhere, right? Because that would just be copying someone else's idea, right? So, what was it?

Tell us, oh unique one, what photographic ideas you've come up with that are totally unique to the world of photography, that you've never seen examples of before, that could never have been inspired in you by seeing examples of them previously by others.

Tell us what's so "original" about shooting landscapes with or without bridges out in the middle of nowhere.

i shot it because i was there. I was there because i follow some of the history around this area. i asked someone involved in local history about where the old train tracks ran in that area. i pulled out my 1800's map and looked at it. Talked to them again to get a better idea of where i might be heading. Then i went searching. The train hasn't run through there in a hundred years. Had nothing to do with me seeing others photos. Had everything to do with my curiosity and determination to track something down. Now if you think i would be a little upset if some weekend fair weather photo wannabee hobbyist with dslr decided ask me where it is because they want to copy my photo, then yeah.. They can go look for it too and come up with their own perspective. .

By the way, what about all the other snapshots where you obviously DIDN'T put that much effort into getting the shots? Shots like where you're just walking around town, see some buildings that interest you for some reason, and shoot them?

Are they fair game for other shooters, or do you "own" them now too, and how do you let other photographers know what it is that you now "own" photographically speaking, and therefore what they are and are not allowed to shoot?

People can shoot whatever they want. I just don't want me or my photographs involved in what they shoot. They are better off coming up with their own voice and ideas anyway. Otherwise everyones photographs look the same. At this point about everything has been done. . You manage to come up with anything original or even semi original covet it. I don't understand why someone would want to copy a photo anyway. I can see a style or premise of a era. I do that. Copying someones actual photo i would think would be worthless on a personal level. It isn't like you actually came up with it. I don't even buy photos or art i would rather make my own. It means more. why on earth would i want someone elses photo or even a mimic of it? Suppose for some people they copy it, get some likes on facebook or maybe sell a print. That is all that matters to them. Maybe they just liked the "idea" and wanted to copy it. Course they never came up with it themselves so it is all pretty much fake and not who they are. Just who they copied..

I like how you just go on and on and on and on without actually addressing the questions raised because of the problems with your statements. Does that come natural, or do you have to work at it?

There is little here worthy of answering. I think another poster just nailed it. There is right and there is wrong.

in the meantime, i am losing daylight. i need to pack my gear and get the hell out of here and stop playing he said she said with you.

 

[snerd]

Strangest thread I've seen in a very long time. I cannot even conceive of worrying about any of the things people in this thread are worrying about! The words stealing and plagiarism have been thrown about, but it seems like the underlying truth is that those things are not what is actually happening. From what I can make of it, some are worried about others taking a shot from the same place, or using a similar technique, or snapping the same subject, because they observed the original 'artist' doing it. I'm sorry....................... that just does not compute. And that's all I'm going to say about that!



......................

 

[JTPhotography]

Every landscape shot is totally unique, like it or not.

You can't just go there at the same time of day, even if the guy who originally shot it told you what that time was or you read the EXIF info and knew he had his camera's clock set correctly. You'd have to shoot it at the same time of day on the same day of the year, and then what are the chances the weather will be the same? You can't just go a few minutes earlier so that the sun will be in the same place in the sky, because it's only there again a year later. It doesn't follow the same path in the sky day after day. And what of the vegetation and the state of the bridge a year later? No change at all? Really?

Ansel spent literally YEARS hiking in Yosemite watching and waiting for the right conditions to get the shots he wanted.

I've revisited the same locations many times, waiting, watching and looking for the right conditions to get a shot that I'd deem a "keeper". If someone else wants to do that, good on them. It's no skin off my nose, and takes NOTHING from what I did to get the shot, nor does it detract in any way from the pride I have when I look at my photo of it.

I really just don't get it. I've never before encountered photographers who are so proud of something they shot that they refuse to show it to any other photographers, for fear that the other photographers will like it so much that they'll want to emulate it.

They aren't putting the work in and coming up with their own ideas. what is their not to get? You would think at least a little originality and efforts could be expected. I am all for the sharing and learning thing but at some point it is closer to photographer welfare. Not like they are earning it. And no, they can't EXACTLY replicate your image. But they aren't even putting the work in to deserve to come even close to it.

Because they didn't walk the same distance you did to get to it? Yeah, they did. So much for the work part.

Because they didn't think to go shoot that location? Yeah, they did. Oh, the reason YOU thought it up is different than the reason THEY thought it up, so only yours counts, eh?

So then, ANY shot you've EVER seen in your lifetime that might inspire you to go get a similar shot, like say, a landscape with a bridge out in the middle of nowhere, is off limits to you, because someone else thought it up first, right? Or does that only apply to SPECIFIC locations that YOU want to claim as "YOURS"?

So, tell us, what EXACTLY was it that made you want to go shoot whatever it was that is so unique to YOUR brain, and nobody else's? Seeing photos of landscapes with bridges out in the middle of nowhere didn't inspire you to go find and shoot a bridge out in the middle of nowhere, right? Because that would just be copying someone else's idea, right? So, what was it?

Tell us, oh unique one, what photographic ideas you've come up with that are totally unique to the world of photography, that you've never seen examples of before, that could never have been inspired in you by seeing examples of them previously by others.

Tell us what's so "original" about shooting landscapes with or without bridges out in the middle of nowhere.

i shot it because i was there. I was there because i follow some of the history around this area. i asked someone involved in local history about where the old train tracks ran in that area. i pulled out my 1800's map and looked at it. Talked to them again to get a better idea of where i might be heading. Then i went searching. The train hasn't run through there in a hundred years. Had nothing to do with me seeing others photos. Had everything to do with my curiosity and determination to track something down. Now if you think i would be a little upset if some weekend fair weather photo wannabee hobbyist with dslr decided ask me where it is because they want to copy my photo, then yeah.. They can go look for it too and come up with their own perspective. .

By the way, what about all the other snapshots where you obviously DIDN'T put that much effort into getting the shots? Shots like where you're just walking around town, see some buildings that interest you for some reason, and shoot them?

Are they fair game for other shooters, or do you "own" them now too, and how do you let other photographers know what it is that you now "own" photographically speaking, and therefore what they are and are not allowed to shoot?

People can shoot whatever they want. I just don't want me or my photographs involved in what they shoot. They are better off coming up with their own voice and ideas anyway. Otherwise everyones photographs look the same. At this point about everything has been done. . You manage to come up with anything original or even semi original covet it. I don't understand why someone would want to copy a photo anyway. I can see a style or premise of a era. I do that. Copying someones actual photo i would think would be worthless on a personal level. It isn't like you actually came up with it. I don't even buy photos or art i would rather make my own. It means more. why on earth would i want someone elses photo or even a mimic of it? Suppose for some people they copy it, get some likes on facebook or maybe sell a print. That is all that matters to them. Maybe they just liked the "idea" and wanted to copy it. Course they never came up with it themselves so it is all pretty much fake and not who they are. Just who they copied..

I like how you just go on and on and on and on without actually addressing the questions raised because of the problems with your statements. Does that come natural, or do you have to work at it?

There is no problem with his statement, he made himself clear. I suspect that the reason this topic has made you so angry is that you engage in this type of copying quite frequently and/or have been called out on it before? Is that true?

 

[JTPhotography]

From what I can make of it, some are worried about others taking a shot from the same place, or using a similar technique, or snapping the same subject, because they observed the original 'artist' doing it. I'm sorry....................... that just does not compute.

......................

It does compute, and that is exactly what is happening.

 

[snerd]

Or perhaps I'm still not getting the underlying argument. lol!

 

[yellow ant]

Feb 11:

That or hopefully from the photos on the website or posted here and with the discussion on the forum people can work it out. The best things come with a bit of effort and this certainly looks worthwhile. The results are stunning, as you can see.

Feb 21:

The people on this forum make me sick with jealousy as they are so good. Most photos are simply stunning compared to anything I can compose.

At the moment not sure if they inspire me to learn more and try to become better, or, to just give up and look at other peoples photos and skills.

That's quite an attitude change in 10 days. I thought your results were in your own words "stunning" and you believed that "the best things come with a bit of effort"?

Modesty is an important part of the learning process and losing the pride and attitude will help. I'm right there with you, the immense experience of some of the people here is intimidating but it's also quite flattering when they choose to help me improve. You may want to resurrect your opinion about effort.

My surreal photos are stunning when compared to normal photos but that is due to the unique surreal technique and the huge amount of work put into working out what it is and does to the subject matter. Not my skills as a normal photographer.

Basically I think I am a one trick pony. I am awestruck by the standard and 'eye' that people have but having read this forum I am now realising how much effort and learning over many years it could take. Especially as someone replied saying that you are not even guaranteed being good at the end of it!

I guess I have to decide long term what I want to do with and get out of photography.

 

[JTPhotography]

Or perhaps I'm still not getting the underlying argument. lol!

Maybe this will help.

Editorial Photographers UK - Getty Images wins plagiarism appeal over lookalike photograph

http://img.scoop.it/JvbMnZs8NHdg8crdGorWADl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9

 

[yellow ant]

I think its time for

Can not reply to all so thanks everyone for advice and links

 

[photoguy99]

For every image you have shot there is, among the trillion other images made, a near dupe. Thief!

"And then, when the last photo graph had been made, all the cameras were confiscated and only the government could have them. Now, a rag tag band of outlaws hides in our cities, creeping out at night to make their photo graphs."

 

[photoguy99]

Owning an idea is a very modern and kind of twee notion invented by corporations for their own benefit.

 

[Designer]

I think another poster just nailed it.

Thank you!