Reading mode: Light Dark

Deceptive Practice? Posting other photographers images as your own

Go to last post
J

Jim DeLuco

Senior Member
Messages
1,989
Reaction score
0
Location
Hudson Ma, US
How do professional photographers feel about a photographer posting images on their web site that are not theirs...and representing them as their own? Do you feel this is deceptive to potential clients? The claim is that this just prepresents their style and is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to use them from the original photographer. However, there is no credit to other photographers posted on the site and there is no copyright posted...neither of the posting photographer, nor a copyright of the real photographer.

You probably already know how I feel, as I am posting this note. I have signed a pledge as a member of Professional Photographers of Massachusetts to (among other things) not use deceptive business techniques and it disturbs me to see this happening as I feel it affects the reputation of the professional photography industry.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
 
Jim,

Do you ever get brochures from the PPA for a printer they recommend for spostcards and brochures? They have pre-made cards and flyers with photos on them. You just drop in your own text and slap on a stamp. I think it's horrible! I would never use them but many do.

I think it's misleading to the clients to use other photos as a "representation" of your own work. If pressed in court, a photographer that does this would surely lose. I could just see a case where someone says, "I want one done like you did this one (referring to a 'representative' photo)" and the photographer not being able to do it. Or worse, trying to do it and fail.

Of course, my last few direct mail pieces haven't had the return that I was hoping for. Maybe I should use someone else's photos! haha

Steve
Jim DeLuco said:
How do professional photographers feel about a photographer posting
images on their web site that are not theirs...and representing
them as their own? Do you feel this is deceptive to potential
clients? The claim is that this just prepresents their style and
is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to
use them from the original photographer. However, there is no
credit to other photographers posted on the site and there is no
copyright posted...neither of the posting photographer, nor a
copyright of the real photographer.

You probably already know how I feel, as I am posting this note. I
have signed a pledge as a member of Professional Photographers of
Massachusetts to (among other things) not use deceptive business
techniques and it disturbs me to see this happening as I feel it
affects the reputation of the professional photography industry.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
Click to expand...
 
SRHookEm said:
Jim,

Do you ever get brochures from the PPA for a printer they recommend
for spostcards and brochures? They have pre-made cards and flyers
with photos on them. You just drop in your own text and slap on a
stamp. I think it's horrible! I would never use them but many do.

I think it's misleading to the clients to use other photos as a
"representation" of your own work. If pressed in court, a
photographer that does this would surely lose. I could just see a
case where someone says, "I want one done like you did this one
(referring to a 'representative' photo)" and the photographer not
being able to do it. Or worse, trying to do it and fail.

Of course, my last few direct mail pieces haven't had the return
that I was hoping for. Maybe I should use someone else's photos!
haha

Steve
Click to expand...
Yes, I've seen them by Marathon Press for things like...how to dress for a portrait..what colors to wear, etc. I also feel that even though the brochure is not specifically selling photography services, that it's misleading to have them in your studio. As a client I would feel that this is your work.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
 
In certain art classes at certain art schools that I will not name, they advocated using such tactics in a photography major required class called "Building Business." I took that class and asked the same question and their argument was exactly like you said:

first that it was a "style" or "representation" of what you get, much like a McDonald's commercial showing you a gourmet style cheeseburger when in fact you get a soy patty squashed in a paper cover,

and second that you, as a profesional photographer, should be able to reach the level required to get such results like those on your ads for your own clients.

I think it is wrong to put pictures on your ads or posters in your studio of work that isn't your own, if it could be mistaken to be your own. I have one Ansel Adams picture in my studio but it clearly states "ANSEL ADAMS" accross the bottom. (That and I hope everyone knows his work anyway)

Needless to say i only got a C in that class :)

-Timothy
 
Jim DeLuco said:
The claim is that this just prepresents their style and
is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to
use them from the original photographer.
Click to expand...
It may represent their "style", or at least the style they believe they have, or wish they had.

But it definitely qualifies as deceptive.

A photographer really only has two things to sell: first are his images, his personal style, his vision of what "makes" a photo. It's how you can tell a Farber from a Brown from a Turner.

The second is his, or her, experience.

This is as important, if not more so, as what client would hire someone they know could NOT do the job?

A body of work testifies that you've been there and done that. And realistically, can do it again.

So if I, as a client, go to a wedding site (for example), and I see a dozen beautiful images that appear to come from a dozen different weddings, I'm going to assume that the photographer has actually shot those images AND that he's shot a dozen different weddings. I'm going to assume that he in fact can successfully do mine, because it APPEARS that he's done it before.

If he hasn't, then he's lied to me--implicitly, if not explicitly.

Or to put it another way, if I imply on a job resume that I've had ten years experience running a company, when I have not--then I'm lying to my prospective employer.

And they may not find out about it until it's too late.
 
Of COURSE it's deceptive - how can it be anything but under the conditions you have outlined?

It's distateful and dishonest in the extreme.

If another photographer's work represents their "style" then they should obviously have images just as good to show. No?

Have you actually run across this?

Regards,
Micheal
Jim DeLuco said:
How do professional photographers feel about a photographer posting
images on their web site that are not theirs...and representing
them as their own? Do you feel this is deceptive to potential
clients? The claim is that this just prepresents their style and
is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to
use them from the original photographer. However, there is no
credit to other photographers posted on the site and there is no
copyright posted...neither of the posting photographer, nor a
copyright of the real photographer.

You probably already know how I feel, as I am posting this note. I
have signed a pledge as a member of Professional Photographers of
Massachusetts to (among other things) not use deceptive business
techniques and it disturbs me to see this happening as I feel it
affects the reputation of the professional photography industry.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
Click to expand...
--
---
Micheal
 
Anyone who would represent thier work through other's labours is better off crunching numbers rather than snapping shutters. In other words, it's a common yet quite deceptive business strategy which has no place in art.

I realize that if a photographer wants to make it in the real world, they must be business savvy and promote themselves aggressively. But when it starts to infringe upon one's integrity, especially in that business, it can be disastrous.

If a couple hires a photographer to do thier wedding, they must feel comfortable in trusting that professional to handle thier once in a lifetime moments. They want to know that the professional has experience, integrity, and above all talent and competence. Plagiarism is'nt going to carry you very far in any of those arenas.

In my opinion, photography is like ANY OTHER TRADE......be it plumbing, electrical or mechanical. A certain level of hard-earned experience is called for before one can call him/herself a "professional". A plumber needs a certain amount of verifiable hours within the trade before he gets a journeyman's card. Same with an electrician. If any self-respecting photographer pays thier dues before representing themselves as a "pro", plagiarising other's work would be unnecessary.....for once the time is put in, you will already have your own verifiable portfolio.

I don't understand why some people think they can get the easy way out. They are just cheating themselves, and, more importantly and as previously mentioned, cheating the client.
D.
Micheal Hall said:
It's distateful and dishonest in the extreme.

If another photographer's work represents their "style" then they
should obviously have images just as good to show. No?

Have you actually run across this?

Regards,
Micheal
Jim DeLuco said:
How do professional photographers feel about a photographer posting
images on their web site that are not theirs...and representing
them as their own? Do you feel this is deceptive to potential
clients? The claim is that this just prepresents their style and
is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to
use them from the original photographer. However, there is no
credit to other photographers posted on the site and there is no
copyright posted...neither of the posting photographer, nor a
copyright of the real photographer.

You probably already know how I feel, as I am posting this note. I
have signed a pledge as a member of Professional Photographers of
Massachusetts to (among other things) not use deceptive business
techniques and it disturbs me to see this happening as I feel it
affects the reputation of the professional photography industry.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
Click to expand...
--
---
Micheal
Click to expand...
 
Micheal Hall said:
Of COURSE it's deceptive - how can it be anything but under the
conditions you have outlined?

It's distateful and dishonest in the extreme.

If another photographer's work represents their "style" then they
should obviously have images just as good to show. No?

Have you actually run across this?

Regards,
Micheal
Click to expand...
Yes, the photographer happens to be a member of DPreview also. I prefer not to divulge the name and will allow the photographer the opportunity to respond if they care to.
--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
 
That would surely qualify as deceptive. If the pictures on their website represent their own style, it's surely not too difficult to show some own stuff, is it?

I'm probably missing something here.

Frank
 
We really should wait and give the photographer in question a chance to explain himself before we round up the posse and look for some rope...

I saw the site and was very impressed with the photography. The pictures are great, no question. But SR has a good point, the photographer has been on the forum talking about setting up a new business, and in a very short time has really wonderful wedding pictures with "model types" as bride and grooms.
If they are his, then he is a damn good photographer, end of story.

...and why wouldn't you tell the name of the school that promotes this sort of Enron Portfolio?

--
Mike D

'Sometimes wrong, but never unsure'
 
These kind of deceptive practices have been going on forever.

Years ago as Promotions and Advertising Manager of a large commercial complex I was taken in by a junior member of the art department of a multinational ad agency. He misrepresented his position within the agency and showed the agency's book as his own work, including demo reels of TV ads he'd purportedly directed. I hired him freelance to direct a large project we had going, and this is how I got into photography. I was fired in the resulting fiasco.

As a photographer I had a creative director of a medium sized agency confess over too many beers that he'd used his brother's portfolio to get the job.

Awhile ago a certain photographer in Toronto was showing two published photos of mine as his work around town ( the photos were published uncredited) I only found out because he was unlucky enough to show the photographs in a meeting with the woman who'd actually art directed the original shoot. She kicked him right out of her office on the spot.

I've caught two web sites using my panoramic imagery without permission and I imagine there are others as well.

What can you do? In the old days they had to have original transparencies (pilfered from working as assistants or lab techs) or tear sheets, but the internet makes it as easy as right-clicking an image. I'd imagine this practise is more wide spread than we think.
 
Hi Doug, I know you were a victim of this practice so I imagine you're fairly angry about it too, but it makes it no more excusable to say that theft has been going on forever.

It's wrong, plain and simple. And people who do it should have their name spread far and wide of their actions.

D
Doug B said:
These kind of deceptive practices have been going on forever.

Years ago as Promotions and Advertising Manager of a large
commercial complex I was taken in by a junior member of the art
department of a multinational ad agency. He misrepresented his
position within the agency and showed the agency's book as his own
work, including demo reels of TV ads he'd purportedly directed. I
hired him freelance to direct a large project we had going, and
this is how I got into photography. I was fired in the resulting
fiasco.
As a photographer I had a creative director of a medium sized
agency confess over too many beers that he'd used his brother's
portfolio to get the job.
Awhile ago a certain photographer in Toronto was showing two
published photos of mine as his work around town ( the photos were
published uncredited) I only found out because he was unlucky
enough to show the photographs in a meeting with the woman who'd
actually art directed the original shoot. She kicked him right out
of her office on the spot.
I've caught two web sites using my panoramic imagery without
permission and I imagine there are others as well.
What can you do? In the old days they had to have original
transparencies (pilfered from working as assistants or lab techs)
or tear sheets, but the internet makes it as easy as right-clicking
an image. I'd imagine this practise is more wide spread than we
think.
Click to expand...
 
DarrenH said:
It's wrong, plain and simple. And people who do it should have
their name spread far and wide of their actions.
Click to expand...
From reading the post I'm pretty sure Doug was not condoning the practice.

It's misrepresentation, pure and simple.

Unfortuantely, all too many people these days seem to think nothing of misrepresenting their work, "enhancing" a resume, cheating on a test, falsifying records, engaging in creative accouting, or simply lying to the public.
 
DarrenH said:
It's wrong, plain and simple. And people who do it should have
their name spread far and wide of their actions.
Click to expand...
Oh you can bet that I wasn't shy about telling that story to people within the business.

I used to hire photographers and one of the things I think we as photographers need to keep in mind is that when someone hires us they are often investing a small portion of their careers in us. If things go pear shaped, art directors or art buyers have other people to answer to higher up. Clients, Creative Directors, Owners. A few negative experiences can adversely effect their standing within the company in a hurry. That's why this duplicitous practise is so alarming. At the wrong moment it can be absolutely lethal to someone's career.

This is also why- as someone else posted in this thread - one of the major criteria for hiring a photographer is their experience in the industry. Can they do the job. Have they worked that level before. Do they deliver by deadline. Are they prone to cost overruns. etc. etc.

Saying that the use of these images is for 'demonstration purposes' only is pure sophistry. People who do this know the image of their abilities they are creating. They are creating the illusion of experience where one has to assume none exists. There is no excuse for it. It is completely unethical.

Doug B
Torontowide.com
 
I think it is incredable stupid as a working pro to misrepresent yourself in this way. I would never ever do such a practice it makes you look like an idot and no one should hireyou. Believe me I am all for promoting yourself and your business but this is not the way to do it stay honest with yourself. And what ever happen to pride in yourself and your work
David M. said:
Anyone who would represent thier work through other's labours is
better off crunching numbers rather than snapping shutters. In
other words, it's a common yet quite deceptive business strategy
which has no place in art.
I realize that if a photographer wants to make it in the real
world, they must be business savvy and promote themselves
aggressively. But when it starts to infringe upon one's integrity,
especially in that business, it can be disastrous.
If a couple hires a photographer to do thier wedding, they must
feel comfortable in trusting that professional to handle thier once
in a lifetime moments. They want to know that the professional has
experience, integrity, and above all talent and competence.
Plagiarism is'nt going to carry you very far in any of those arenas.
In my opinion, photography is like ANY OTHER TRADE......be it
plumbing, electrical or mechanical. A certain level of hard-earned
experience is called for before one can call him/herself a
"professional". A plumber needs a certain amount of verifiable
hours within the trade before he gets a journeyman's card. Same
with an electrician. If any self-respecting photographer pays
thier dues before representing themselves as a "pro", plagiarising
other's work would be unnecessary.....for once the time is put in,
you will already have your own verifiable portfolio.
I don't understand why some people think they can get the easy way
out. They are just cheating themselves, and, more importantly and
as previously mentioned, cheating the client.
D.
Micheal Hall said:
It's distateful and dishonest in the extreme.

If another photographer's work represents their "style" then they
should obviously have images just as good to show. No?

Have you actually run across this?

Regards,
Micheal
Jim DeLuco said:
How do professional photographers feel about a photographer posting
images on their web site that are not theirs...and representing
them as their own? Do you feel this is deceptive to potential
clients? The claim is that this just prepresents their style and
is not necessarily their own work and that they have permission to
use them from the original photographer. However, there is no
credit to other photographers posted on the site and there is no
copyright posted...neither of the posting photographer, nor a
copyright of the real photographer.

You probably already know how I feel, as I am posting this note. I
have signed a pledge as a member of Professional Photographers of
Massachusetts to (among other things) not use deceptive business
techniques and it disturbs me to see this happening as I feel it
affects the reputation of the professional photography industry.

--
Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
Click to expand...
--
---
Micheal
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Jim,

I just sent an email to the director of membership services for the PP of A. I'll let you know what kind of response I get. On the site in question, they list themselves as members. Since you're a member of the PP of A (I'm not), can you look them up to see if they are a member?

Doug
 
Doug Mac said:
Jim,

I just sent an email to the director of membership services for the
PP of A. I'll let you know what kind of response I get. On the
site in question, they list themselves as members. Since you're a
member of the PP of A (I'm not), can you look them up to see if
they are a member?

Doug
Click to expand...
--

Actually, I'm not a member of PPA...just PPAM and PPANE. I did find him listed in PPA and PPAM membership....and WPPI.

Jim DeLuco
DeLuco Photography
http://www.delucophoto.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top