PDA

View Full Version : Photography copyright?

CDColt
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 16:45
Well, as Einstein said, everything is relative. Art is relative as well, unfortunately.

My favorite photographer is Sam Abell (long time NG staff member, and for 10 years Chief Photo Editor at NG). He has shot a picture of a cowboy (for a Philip Morris ad) - an idiot ("Richard Prince") re-photographed his picture, took away the title and made two huge copies of the originals. Guggenheim museum put this stolen shot on his guide and the guy has sold the two stolen enlargement for 3 million dollars each.
The guy can not be sued... Absolutely amazing story (check it out the story personally from Sam: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um74DKYlta8)

What do you think about this?
DreDaze
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 17:12
i think i'd be a lot more pissed than sam abell is if someone did that to me...
bric-a-brac
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 17:20
if you think Richard Prince is an upsetting "artist" google the name "Sherry Levine," and to really upset yourself, search for her photograph "After Ed Weston"

...I could scream.
CDColt
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 17:24
Unbelievable. How on earth do they survive without being sued?
AxxisPhoto
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 17:26
Photographers like Sam Abell are masters of what they do. When you achieve that high level of your craft, you don't have to prove yourself to anyone as your work speaks for itself.

He made great points:
1. Everyone still knows the image is a Sam Abell.
2. Although it's legal to re-photograph an image(who knew), it's still plagiarism.
3. The idiot has to live with what's he's done.
4. THE GOLDEN RULE
5. The Guggenhiem and "art" community has to live with their actions.

It's people like Richard Prince who call themselves "artists", yet don't have the creativity to actually go out and make their own images hurt the art form in general.
Good to see that Sam rose above the bulls**t!!
DigitalSpecialist
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 18:06
For what it is worth: Let me infuriate you with another name from the ART community.
Mark Kastabi this name alone should upset you all to know end. WHY, because he was and still is a plagerist, and forger!!!
AxxisPhoto
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 18:13
For what it is worth: Let me infuriate you with another name from the ART community.
Mark Kastabi this name alone should upset you all to know end. WHY, because he was and still is a plagerist, and forger!!!

I Googled his name, but came up with Mark Kostabi. Can you give more details? Thanks.
Nistelrooydude
19th of January 2009 (Mon), 20:23
Harsh words from Abell, but he's right. What a jerk he (Prince) is.
XterraJohn
20th of January 2009 (Tue), 02:46
How is this any different than me making a recording of a CD while it's being played and then selling copies? I thought that that was illegal?
CDColt
20th of January 2009 (Tue), 05:34
I don't get it either how come that he can not be sued. But turst me, I am sure the Philip Morris and Sam did their very best.

I guess it is one thing that we have plagiarist idiots like these thiefs, but the other side is that we have idiot buyers who buy these prints for millions, and museums who let these guys in...