Aeros: I have never been able to understand jealousy. Jealousy is the main reason I stopped exhibiting my paintings in galleried shows. Instead I sell my paintings and giclee prints directly to my clients without galleries or agents. I sell a lot less in quantity as a result, but the actual sale direct is far more satisfying for me.
The best endorsement of my work is for a collector to put cash in my hand and tell me how happy they are to own a work by me. I leave all the pettiness behind, all the squabbling and mean mouthing. I just paint and shoot for me! If someone likes my work and buys it, that’s all I need to know, all the rest is just noise.
Elena Shumilova’s work IMHO is at a genius level and it inspires me to do better at my own photography. The fact that I have been at this photography thing for more than forty five years, and Elena about two, is of no consequence to me, the fact is, I can learn from her as I can from anyone who produces such fine work.
@ mcshan. I'm certainly not jealous of Andy Wahole. @ carabas. I strive for perfection with every work I produce and always fail, so I am inspired by those who produce work that motivates me to try yet again. Give this a try yourself instead of wasting your time with sarcasm.
I have never been able to understand jealousy. Jealousy is the main reason I stopped exhibiting my paintings in galleried shows. Instead I sell my paintings and giclee prints directly to my clients without galleries or agents. I sell a lot less in quantity as a result, but the actual sale direct is far more satisfying for me.
fastprime: Critics in the use of Photoshop (or other pp sw) must all be jpeg shooters, 'cause last time I checked RAW files have to be converted and adjusted through a post-processing workflow. JPEGs go through an automated conversion process in-camera.
If the photog is not going to adjust the RAW file after opening it in software(i.e., file open>file save as) they'd actually get better results shooting straight jpegs, cause unedited RAW files look flat.
This is the most intelligent comment on PP I have ever read
zos xavius: F*** THAT! This company does not have permission to print my work. If they do it will be their lawsuit!
Continued from previous post...
Bottom line, IMHO FB fails in its assertion to usage of copyright protected works, by not having written and signed agreements between the True Author and FB. To sell the rights to a third party is Copyright Infringement of Moral rights on two counts Conversion and Distortion. I am not a lawyer and this is my personal opinion, it’s worthy to note that I did win my case without a lawyer.
A couple of years back I sued a Japanese owned oil company, for copyright infringement of my rights in and to a logo I designed and they used but refused payment. I won an out of court settlement far in excess of the amount I would have charged them as my regular fee. They ended up paying many thousands more and a staggering amount in legal fees.
The best weapon I had, was not to use a lawyer and to become fully conversant with the Copyright Act. I believe FB would not survive a challenge in court for Copyright infringement based on their TOS. The Intellectual rights may be transferred via a written and signed agreement (required by law) but Moral rights are not transferable, but remain with the true author for life plus fifty years after the death of the author, the rights belong to the author’s estate.
Canadian Copyright LawCanada in the past few months revised its copyright laws giving photographers more protection and rights under the revised act. The revision has basically caught up with the rest of the world and in particular the US.
Prior to the lobbying of a photography organization named CAPIC “Canadian Association of Photographers in Communications” there was no copyright protection for photographers, as there is for other authors of “Intellectual Works” like painters, writers, song writes et al. The Act now provides the same rights as was draughted at the Bearn Treaty. My case was about 12 years old, but I still won it.
for the rest of this post contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
All that stuff, wow! I wonder if they could make it boil an egg, make a cup of coffee and toast a bagle? Then I could take a photo of my breakfast and post it to facebook.
Kim Letkeman: "Fair Use" : Examples of fair use include commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship.
One wonders exactly which of those uses the lawyer was claiming that her video-for-money might have been classified under ... what a stretch :-)
MadsR: It is an infrigement by conversion and distortion to use a recognizable element of an intelectual work without the original authors consent. This is clearly stated in the Copyright Act. I have not come accross anywhere in the Act the word "Derivative". If you could point me to it, I would like to confirm.