1. Forum
  2. General Discussion | Introductions | Off Topic Forum
  3. Photography General Discussion
  4. Painting from photographs, is this illegal?

Painting from photographs, is this illegal?


12 years 5 months ago #171023 by Time Cut
Is it illegal to take a subject from one photograph and a subject from another so on... and paint those subjects into a single canvas?

I ran into a photographer who is also a painter. He told him his style is to take subjects like a house, a dog, a ocean etc.. all from different photographs (which he may or may not taken) and paint them into a single painting. Is there some sort of copyright law on this?
,
12 years 5 months ago #171036 by Baydream
I think a lot depends on 1) are the photos his/hers, 2) will the painting be on sale, and 3) how recognizable are the elements of the photos from others.
I often work from photos and occasionally take elements from different photos. The manner in which I do it would make it difficult to "link" a particular element to a particular photo.
I think your friend is pretty safe unless the element is OBVIOUSLY taken from a photo that has not reached the "public domain".
Shoot, learn and share. It will make you a better photographer.
fineartamerica.com/profiles/john-g-schickler.html?tab=artwork
Photo Comments
,
12 years 5 months ago #171038 by Scout 4x4
I know it's alright to do paintings from your own photographs, there is nothing against copyright there. However I do think it's against copyright to paint a photo that is not yours.
,
12 years 5 months ago #171053 by Baydream
Bit if you "borrow" the concept and not the details, you are probably OK. My wife asked an artist friend if she could use a watercolor design of hers to hook a rug in the Nova Scotia style. My wife is a very good "hooker" :ohmy: and the artist was delighted to be able to see another interpretation of her design.

Just be careful of how recognizable the "copied" element is but often the "interpretation" looks little like the original work.
Shoot, learn and share. It will make you a better photographer.
fineartamerica.com/profiles/john-g-schickler.html?tab=artwork
Photo Comments
,
12 years 5 months ago #171076 by icepics
Your wife was respectful enough to ask... I would think as you said if it's public domain it wouldn't be an issue, or if someone does a painting etc. of one of their own photos that's their own work and up to them.

Artists often do a sketch and then a painting based on their sketches, so taking a photo and using that as a basis for a painting seems like basically the same thing.

Probably where it could become an issue would be reproducing an entire photo that is someone else's, that could get into copyright infringement unless permission is given. As with many things there's probably a fine line somewhere between directly copying someone else's work and using it in part as inspiration for your work.
Sharon
Photo Comments
,
12 years 5 months ago #171080 by Shakey
I can't really see how this is illegal, afterall fine artists, particularly painters have re-used elements from other artists work, since forever. Alot of these "elements" would have been "known" through photographic reproductions of the former's artwork, in the past century & in other forms of reproductions before then.

Often the elements used will be almost exact copies, yet I can think of no court case where this has been challenged. I see no difference between an artist painting from a photograph or a photographer, photographing from a painting.

Some examples to consider:

an artist selling paintings copied from a more famous artist, is not breaking the law unless they try to pass their painting off as a genuine "insert name of famous artist here".

Andy Warhol reproduced images directly from newspapers eg. Jackie O, Marilyn, Car crashes etc

Using photomontages of copyrighted photos is also, not illegal.

The band Scottish band Franz Ferdinand used a Rodchenko photo as the basis for the artwork on their album: You could have it so much better.

Regards
,
12 years 5 months ago #171143 by The Original Daisy

Shakey wrote: I can't really see how this is illegal, afterall fine artists, particularly painters have re-used elements from other artists work, since forever. Alot of these "elements" would have been "known" through photographic reproductions of the former's artwork, in the past century & in other forms of reproductions before then.

Often the elements used will be almost exact copies, yet I can think of no court case where this has been challenged. I see no difference between an artist painting from a photograph or a photographer, photographing from a painting.

Some examples to consider:

an artist selling paintings copied from a more famous artist, is not breaking the law unless they try to pass their painting off as a genuine "insert name of famous artist here".

Andy Warhol reproduced images directly from newspapers eg. Jackie O, Marilyn, Car crashes etc

Using photomontages of copyrighted photos is also, not illegal.

The band Scottish band Franz Ferdinand used a Rodchenko photo as the basis for the artwork on their album: You could have it so much better.

Regards


I'm with you on this one
The following user(s) said Thank You: Shakey
,
12 years 5 months ago #171168 by Baydream

Shakey wrote: Using photomontages of copyrighted photos is also, not illegal.

I would be REAL careful about this. I can feel the burn. Try including a "Getty image" in your photomantage and duck. Even including a copyrighted photo (and some copyrighted buildings and artwork) in your photo for anything but personal use could get you nailed.
Shoot, learn and share. It will make you a better photographer.
fineartamerica.com/profiles/john-g-schickler.html?tab=artwork
Photo Comments
,
12 years 5 months ago - 12 years 5 months ago #171185 by Henry Peach
That would be a derivative work if elements are taken from any copyrighted piece.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work
mattneedham.zenfolio.com
,
12 years 5 months ago #171191 by geoffellis

Henry Peach wrote: That would be a derivative work if elements are taken from any copyrighted piece.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_work


Additionally, Fair Use can also come into play... combined with Derivative Works... and youre probably pretty safe...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
www.geoffellis.ca
,
12 years 5 months ago #171300 by Joves
No because you are not actually using their photos a model to create an original work. It would be like you being somewhere and painting the scene, the only difference is it is people, and then that is debatable as to whether it is a infringement.
,
12 years 5 months ago - 12 years 5 months ago #171319 by Stealthy Ninja
What about that dude who took the allied press photo of obama off the net and did they "OBEY" no that's not right... what was it? "CHANGE" poster. He got into hot water on that one.
img\def

www.aevansphoto.com
,
12 years 5 months ago #171376 by Crammer
How could that be illegal? It would be like saying it was illegal for someone to take a photo of artwork, or painting of a scene in general.
Photo Comments
,
12 years 5 months ago #171729 by Shakey
I'm coming at this from an art-historical perspective & thinking of artists such a John Heartfield, Alexander Rodchenko & the Dadaists before them.
,
12 years 5 months ago #171757 by icepics
Adrian it was Shepard Fairey; some of his work was done here locally. The issue w/the image you mentioned was that he used a photo that was recognizeable with little alteration without permission or compensating the photographer for usage.

Sometimes it isn't permissable to photograph artwork. Museums may or may not allow it, although some of the concern is more conserving art and preventing additional light exposure. There was a Rembrandt exhibit I went to locally where you could not take cameras into that area of the museum and they had more than the usual security (probably because of the age and historic value of the works).

There's a difference too I think in taking a photo of a framed, displayed piece of artwork, and using someone else's photo in some way for your own purposes; that's where the useage is questionable w/out permission or compensation.
Sharon
Photo Comments
,

  1. Forum
  2. General Discussion | Introductions | Off Topic Forum
  3. Photography General Discussion
  4. Painting from photographs, is this illegal?

817.3K

241K

  • Facebook

    817,251 / Likes

  • Twitter

    241,000 / Followers

  • Google+

    1,620,816 / Followers

Show Me...

Visit 4wdtlak Forum
Saal

Latest Reviews

Canon EOS R100 Review

The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!

Apr 22, 2024
Nikon Zfc Review

Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.

Apr 15, 2024
Canon EOS R50 Review

The Canon EOS R50 is one of the newest R-system cameras from Canon. Is it worth your money? Find out all the details you need to know in this comprehensive review.

Apr 10, 2024
Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II Review

The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!

Mar 27, 2024
More Articles
Ikan

Forum Top Posters

Sponsored Imageimages2/mpb145x145buy.pngSponsored Imageimages2/50off.jpg
Sponsored ImageSponsored Image

Latest Articles

Guiding the Eye: Mastering Leading Lines in Photography

Using leading lines in photography helps improve the composition by drawing viewers in and leading their eye from the foreground to the background. Explore some fine examples of this in this guide!

Apr 24, 2024
Must-Have Insta360 Accessories

The Insta360 has one of the best lineups of action cams and 360-degree cameras. With these Insta360 accessories, you can elevate your photography and videography game!

Apr 24, 2024
5 Keys for More Impactful Photos of Landscapes

Creating impactful photos of landscapes depends on many factors, not the least of which is your talent behind the lens. This guide explores other elements required for the best product.

Apr 23, 2024
Canon EOS R100 Review

The Canon EOS R100 is an entry-level mirrorless camera introduced in 2023. But just because it’s an entry-level camera doesn’t mean it’s a bare-bones camera. Find out why in this review!

Apr 22, 2024
Expert Tips to Upgrade Your Camera Gear With Used Equipment

Are you ready to upgrade your camera? Before buying new, you might consider the value of purchasing used gear to save money.

Apr 18, 2024
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV vs Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III

The Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark IV is a micro four thirds camera released in 2020. It’s an entry-level system along with the OM-D E-M5 Mark III. Use this guide to determine which one is best for you!

Apr 17, 2024
What is Blue Hour Photography?

Blue hour photography might not be as well known as golden hour photography, but it is every bit as good a time to create epic images of landscapes. Learn how in this quick tutorial!

Apr 17, 2024
Nikon Zfc Review

Nikon’s retro-looking Nikon Zfc is anything but retro. Under its classic body is a host of features and amenities that make it a worthwhile compact mirrorless camera for 2024.

Apr 15, 2024
More Articles