Other photographers copying your images?

I didn't look at any more than the two examples given, but I agree with the person who said that they are different enough to not be considered "copying". At least in my non-legally binding opinion. If he's doing it all the time and has a knack for showing his right after you show yours, I can ceratinly see how annoying that would be, almost intrusive, but sometimes shots are of common landmarks are pretty much obvious so I think it'd be hard to claim originality.

As far as I know, you can go to a same spot and take pretty similar/if not same composition and not violate copyright laws. Otherwise, the estate of Ansel Adams would be really really really really really rich.

You can either take imitation as a form of flattery or never put up images on the net.

I don't really see a problem here, unless you own the land in question.

You can't really say he is copying you, because each piece of land will no doubt have already been shot before! I'd imagine there may be someone else somewhere like you, claiming that you have copied them!

If you are selling your pictures, you have nothing at all to worry about!

And if you are worried, then you shouldn't have them on sites like flickr, which allow you images to be easily and publically viewed.

But nice shot anyway

ssim wrote in post #4936556
You know what they say, imitation is the greatest form of flattery.

Best point yet. Pat yourself on the back bubbawillums.

I don't see what you're all bent out of shape about. Just about every photographer that ever held a camera at one point saw something that inspired them. You can't tell me you've never seen someone else's work and thought "I could do that better" or "I wonder how he did that?". This guy took the initiative to go out there and try to reproduce something he saw value in.

If you're worried about this guy encroaching on your business, then it's simply up to you to keep kicking out better work than he can. Also might not hurt to keep your locations secret.. though that's probably not as easy since you're both from the same place.

It's always good to learn from other shooters. Take what they do well and imitate it, and take note of what they do poorly so you know what to stay away from. Who knows, maybe this guy could even teach you a trick or two.

bubbawillums wrote in post #4936097
Does anyone know where i stand on this issue??

You're standing in the same places he is.

As any successfule landscape photographer will tell you, you need to stand in places he can't get to. Or stand in a way that he can't figure out. Ask for escorts. Ask permission to access restricted areas. You'd be amazed what a little sweet talking can do.

He's well within his rights to do this sort of flattery.

I put a comment up under his shot "Wow, looks just like a shot from flickr user dandesborough". I'd be happy to put up some more comments too if I knew which shots to look at.

thanks for all of your help and advice guys..
i was probably a biy hasty in posting this thread but im glad i have as its helped me to see things from the other point of view and also to realise im being a bit selfish and stupid

remember last year when someone, i dont remember if it was Flickr or a third party company.. any how, they wanted to make a program for flickr users that will basically, search all of flickr for the same image you have and use it to help yours, like if you took a photo of some popular tourist attraction but screwed up the exposure and blew out the sky, this program will find as close a shot as possible and mix it with yours. I wonder what became of that?

I'd have a word with Serena here too:

http://www.pbase.com/s​erenab/folkestone

I mean, how *dare* she take photos of Folkestone, I'll bet she doesn't even live there.... worst of all she is trying to sell these.

Phone the Police!

Tee Why wrote in post #4937423
As far as I know, you can go to a same spot and take pretty similar/if not same composition and not violate copyright laws. Otherwise, the estate of Ansel Adams would be really really really really really rich.

You can either take imitation as a form of flattery or never put up images on the net.

I have a friend at work who was part of a group that worked to recreate an Adams photo quite a few years back. It was the Moon and Half Dome shot and getting it right was a big deal because of time of year, position of the moon, and position of the sun on the rock face. They had bad weather on the day and a lot more could cover, but one brief period gave them the moon visible, and the sun out, and they got their shot. Adams' daughter was actually there, and it made it in to the papers. Pretty cool event.

IF you think that was bad one of the contributors to Outdoor Photographer complained that his quite distinctive shot of wild horses crossing a stream had been copied by an artist. A shot that took him some time and a lot knowledge on the animals behavior to get.

To add insult to injury the artist was selling his painting for much more that he could sell fine art prints for.

I remember that. I'm pretty sure if Ansel were alive he would have been ranting about it. I've been setup for a shot many times and a tourist walks by and goes, oooh that's pretty. Whips out their powershot, and snaps off a couple and walks off. The thing is the people who look at his/her photo's will most likely never see mine or I theirs. It would be nice if the guy threw you an email saying I like your work at least but if he's copying you I doubt that'll happen.

also to this point if you look around on that site you will see people who have nothing but images copied from the web, if it bugs you ,don't post their , copyright your work ,build a website .You have inspired some one , you created art. That is a good thing ...imo. john

bubbawillums wrote in post #4936199
This is an example of what i mean..
The first shot is my one of which i have sold to local businesses and is a popular seller..

This one is his shot.
http://www.flickr.com …ibbsy/222306765​0/sizes/m/

FWIW, his shot doesn't hold a candle to yours. Yours feels more desolate.