The people on this forum make me sick

[Kane Adams]

Eh, in all honesty I almost regret buying a DSLR because I have some pretty decent shots with my good ol' point & shoot which I don't see how I'll ever top, but at the same time I don't want to give up on this hobby. It's simply too addictive to me.
The only thing I've given up on is comparing my work to that of others. It gets me down every time I do that.

 

[Overread16 4]

Eh, in all honesty I almost regret buying a DSLR because I have some pretty decent shots with my good ol' point & shoot which I don't see how I'll ever top, but at the same time I don't want to give up on this hobby. It's simply too addictive to me.
The only thing I've given up on is comparing my work to that of others. It gets me down every time I do that.

We can indeed end up putting ourselves in a position where we get too much inspiration. This is especailly true if we lack guidance or achievement in what we are doing; since we keep exposing ourselves to great work and being inspired ,but never quite reaching that point.

That's why books on methods, articles online and critique from forums are highly valuable elements. It lets you learn theory; study it; get ideas and also get feedback. Feedback being key in helping one develop and eye for faults and good points; but also why they are there, how and why we got them and (in the case of faults) howe we can avoid doing them again.

 

[astroNikon]

... 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.

I took a majestic photo of a toilet once. I'm trying to find it, but once you see it it will make your eyes and cheeks go Flush ...

 

[pixmedic]

... 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.

I took a majestic photo of a toilet once. I'm trying to find it, but once you see it it will make your eyes and cheeks go Flush ...

i hope you find it, wouldn't want all that hard work to go down the drain.

 

[snowbear116 47]

... 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.

I took a majestic photo of a toilet once. I'm trying to find it, but once you see it it will make your eyes and cheeks go Flush ...

... 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.

I took a majestic photo of a toilet once. I'm trying to find it, but once you see it it will make your eyes and cheeks go Flush ...

i hope you find it, wouldn't want all that hard work to go down the drain.

I want to see artistry, not just another crappy snapshot.

 

[Buckster]

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.

You're the one saying it's okay sometimes and that it's a gray area. I'm just trying to find out from you how you decide when it's wrong and when it's not. Where and how do you draw the line?

Someone shot Half Dome first. Why don't you think we need to respect that, but others have to respect anything you shoot first?

It's a simple question.

 

[snerd]

I'm going to make a statement that should give you all chills............................... always be looking over your shoulder. I'm always lurking about. And I'll take any photo I damn well want to. Even if I get the idea from you! So there.




...........


ETA: secure your gear!!!

 

[Buckster]

I'm going to make a statement that should give you all chills............................... always be looking over your shoulder. I'm always lurking about. And I'll take any photo I damn well want to. Even if I get the idea from you! So there.




...........


ETA: secure your gear!!!

Good idea.

I'm specifically going to find and follow Brian and JT around, stand where they stand and shoot what they shoot. I'm going to make sure that I shoot at the same ISO, shutter and aperture settings they do, then I'm going to process them exactly the same way as them, even if I have to hire a hacker to see what they see on their systems. I want to be SURE that I replicate their photos exactly, so that no one can tell them apart.

This will obviously allow me to win at life and photography.

 

[snerd]

Ahhhh........... I was "really" needing a good laugh tonight! Thanks!

 

[pixmedic]

I'm going to make a statement that should give you all chills............................... always be looking over your shoulder. I'm always lurking about. And I'll take any photo I damn well want to. Even if I get the idea from you! So there.




...........


ETA: secure your gear!!!

Good idea.

I'm specifically going to find and follow Brian and JT around, stand where they stand and shoot what they shoot. I'm going to make sure that I shoot at the same ISO, shutter and aperture settings they do, then I'm going to process them exactly the same way as them, even if I have to hire a hacker to see what they see on their systems. I want to be SURE that I replicate their photos exactly, so that no one can tell them apart.

This will obviously allow me to win at life and photography.

Then, when they accidentally upload it to the web, im going to snag it and use it as my desktop background!

 

[snerd]

Then, when they accidentally upload it to the web, im going to snag it and use it as my desktop background!

And then post it on the desktop wallpaper thread!!

 

[Buckster]

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.

Put all his posts on this subject together, and it's as clear as mud. His response to this one carried on at length without actually addressing the post he quoted, one of your pet peeves, as I recall, and he completely ignored all the questions and comments in the one before that, like someone running from something scary.

I suspect that the reason this topic has made you so angry

Oh look! There's that faux-mind reading thing you think you know how to do again. Too bad I'm not at all angry. Pull out your Magic 8 Ball and guess again.

is that you engage in this type of copying quite frequently and/or have been called out on it before? Is that true?

Sorry, nope. I've certainly made photos similar to those that others before me have also made, and that others after me will also make, but never been "called out on it", which would be childish of someone to do.

I think your Magic 8 Ball might be broken. Might want to have that checked out...

 

[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.

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.

You're the one saying it's okay sometimes and that it's a gray area. I'm just trying to find out from you how you decide when it's wrong and when it's not. Where and how do you draw the line?

Someone shot Half Dome first. Why don't you think we need to respect that, but others have to respect anything you shoot first?

It's a simple question.

I answered it. But you can keep bumping the thread with your angry nonsense, that is, if you're not too busy stealing photos.

 

[JTPhotography]

I'm going to make a statement that should give you all chills............................... always be looking over your shoulder. I'm always lurking about. And I'll take any photo I damn well want to. Even if I get the idea from you! So there.




...........


ETA: secure your gear!!!

Good idea.

I'm specifically going to find and follow Brian and JT around, stand where they stand and shoot what they shoot. I'm going to make sure that I shoot at the same ISO, shutter and aperture settings they do, then I'm going to process them exactly the same way as them, even if I have to hire a hacker to see what they see on their systems. I want to be SURE that I replicate their photos exactly, so that no one can tell them apart.

This will obviously allow me to win at life and photography.

Spoken like a man with experience.

 

[snerd]

I answered it. But you can keep bumping the thread with your angry nonsense, that is, if you're not too busy stealing photos.

Wow! Really?! I see only 2 people here that are angry, and it ain't the Buckster.