1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

sillyQ? hello- copy rights?

Discussion in 'Finding Content' started by bass, Jan 18, 2007.

  1. bass

    bass New Member

    :p

    but

    :shrug:

    i see this great photograph on the net, i want to use it... lets says maybe in a very public and commercial gig..

    should i worry about any "property" copy "right"??

    i feel silly asking this question (maybe coz im kinda new), but should i? accredit the content? or inform the artist before using their artwork?

    thank you very much


    :Smoking:
     
  2. bass

    bass New Member

    yeah i am kinda enjoying the forum's icons too :)
     
  3. holly

    holly WetCircuit.com

    If you gave us the link I'm sure we could all state our opinions whether they are worthy or not.
     
  4. bass

    bass New Member

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]


    these for example... if i used any of them, maybe deformed it, or plain should i tell each author?
     
  5. bass

    bass New Member

    i love the last one so much!!! it can make wonders! if in kaleido style shifting no?..
     
  6. complexvisuals

    complexvisuals Eye Squared

    Yes you should. Get permission from them rather than just telling them. Would you like someone else to pass off your work as their own?

    C
     
  7. holly

    holly WetCircuit.com

    I think I should wait to answer. I have smugly opened a can of worms.

    ...But the images are of public urban spaces. Is there no way for you to use these as inspiration and shoot something similar? Then you avoid the moral question.
     
  8. holly

    holly WetCircuit.com

    Because the artist has added his name to each photo, it is clear he wants you to be able to contact him -- he has gone to the trouble to make it easy for you. Further, if you used the photos without asking you would probably have to strip off his name. You cannot claim "random web photos" in this case. Here you would be deliberately ripping off another artist.

    I agree with Sean, since he went to this extra effort to label his work, you should meet him at his level and ask for permission. Show him your work. There is often generosity to a fellow artist.
     
  9. KillingFrenzy

    KillingFrenzy KillingFrenzy Visuals

    Ask and you might receive

    I have a friend that's been touring, and he's been trying to include some "local color" at each show by flickr-ing up photos of the area and using them. Since he knows ahead of time where he's going, he picked out groups from a few people and then mailed them asking if he could use them. A couple refused, but most said yes, and none of them wanted money. However, none of these were professional photographers. Even so, I think many people would be happy to have their artwork used in a show as long as they are asked ahead of time, and in some cases credited openly. Obviously "credits" at events are tricky unless you're doing more of a sit/down arty event. You might even meet a new friend/collaborator. He also had one person post some extra photos for him that made a nice series of images to use. So, by asking he actually got more participation.
     
  10. bass

    bass New Member


    cool... yeah in fact i always ask the authors, i once used a flickr photo for a personal design, and the photographer was so happy to hear about his work used... and i was so happy to have made him happy ... its nice energy..

    but i got confused since VJing is a new form, and the amount of images and things that we can use are alot.... and thought since its a new form, it might be free of some things like that... that it would be in some way a universal understanding .. but thats just naive of me...

    but ofcourse would never want to have any work thought mine when its not! if its not me its not and it would show...

    yes permission rather than telling ;)

    also good idea to get inspirations... and check flickr groups..

    thanks alot...
     
  11. ASMD

    ASMD Steel City Visuals

    I'd have to agree with Holly, just go and take your own photographs/video.

    That last photo looks like the Gare do Oriente in Lisbon, by Calatrava (my favorite architect, as it happens). You should go and see it, awe inspiring stuff.
    [​IMG]
     
  12. Rovastar

    Rovastar /..\

    What Holly said
     
  13. bass

    bass New Member

    cool.. yeah i am already starting to... collecting footage, and making my own, its more about how i see the music moving...

    @ASMD: wow it looks very nice..

    btw djsounds.com have some loops for download for free.. thought it was nice...
     
  14. 2lb

    2lb photoshop pimp

    I have plagiarised and stolen my way through projects with delight and abandon on many an occasion, the clone tool is my friend and I love nothing more than rubbing out the original artist's name in the corner with glee..., but an email from said author of a nice piece saying 'go for it' is worth its weight in gold:roll:

    The first snap is very similar to many a $250 getty snap but one of the best I have seen, love the last too...
     
  15. vj_jasper

    vj_jasper imagination

    interesting! i only just found Calatrava's work today (via something Holly mentioned in another thread). Total inspiration!

    perhaps the architects should be questioned as to whether it is okay to photograph their work? haha j/k

    the question of - "how would you like it if someone tried to pass of your work as their own?" is a valid question, however i do think it is important to mention here that this is about a vj gig, not a photography exhibition or for that matter a video art exhibition.

    vj's are in some ways like 'culture presentor/selektorz'... however,just because it is a vj gig does not release you legally... or morally, if that was to be considered...

    my advice? be as creative as you can be and do not let anything hold you back. go for it, make the art, do it! have no fear and do contact artists or photographers and see if it is okay. they will probably say yes, if you explain what it is you would like to do, and that it is an ephemeral thing, performed for not much monet.
    it is wonderful to involve other people's work in creative performances with their knowledge and blessing.
    like has been said before, it's a good energy.
     
  16. Motionreactor

    Motionreactor www.motionreactor.net

    www.istockphoto.com has fairly cheap stock photos which have simple licensing rules. There's a wide selection of photos and the search seems pretty effective. You can pay through Paypal too which is also useful.
     
  17. 2lb

    2lb photoshop pimp

    I have a friend who makes a reasonable income from people downloading his illustrations from i-stockphoto.
    I believe they are starting to offer video too...
     
  18. vanakaru

    vanakaru I've given money to VJForums

    I am such an individualist that I feel always uneasy using content other than my own. There is a feeling that if I would record the images myself I would see something different and BETTER.
    Recently I needed a subway images and since we do not have one in Estonia I travelled to Stockholm and got wonderful stuff. Very different than I saw on the web before.
    And I feel great.
     
  19. 2lb

    2lb photoshop pimp

    Surely this is a subjective issue. Architecture aside, what about government training films, scientific imagery like electron microscopy, muhammed ali vs george foreman fights, the use of 3d models, anything visual that is used out of context by the vj, instances where the original artist simply cannot be identified? Does the VJ humm and aa about copyright or just play and be damned?
     
  20. deepvisual

    deepvisual visually challenged


    2000 years ago VJs were debating if it was ok to copy the bible...

    its still going on.
     
  21. holly

    holly WetCircuit.com

    No, not everyone. If you don't go looking for other people's content you generally don't find it. Samplers might say different, but I don't see anyone forcing me to steal government film or scientific imagery. On the contrary, most of the best of this type of content is free and legal to use from Archive.org.

    3D models (free or paid) generally come with a license that allows for use of the model in an animation, but not to give out the 3d file. This isn't really a copyright issue, but it is brought into these debates because it is meant to suggest the "hipocracy" of using someone else's content. This is as off-base as saying using an AfterEffects plugin is using someone else's content. It isn't, and I don't see any sort of copyright conflict.

    My opinion is that VJs are only worried about copyright because they fear they are on the wrong side of it. It becomes a high-moral issue because they want to violate it with impunity. Look at the endless debates on these forums which read more like justifications than revolutions. You don't become Che Guevera just by showing Hollywood samples, that's ridiculous. In the US, using media samples in an artistic recontextualization is enough to absolve you of guilt. Until a court says otherwise, I've no reason to doubt that VJing a boxing match, the nightly news, a Hollywood film would be recognized as a recontextualization, so the revolution is a ghost said around campfires to scare newbies.

    HOWEVER, when you sample another artist who is living and can sue you, it would be difficult to show how art --> art = recontextualization. Warhol tried it several times and LOST; he had to pay up for using art photography in his silkscreen paintings (this is the closest analogy to VJing I can find in art lawsuits). You will read again and again the moral position that sampling from Hollywood is not "wrong", but it is "wrong" to steal from a fellow artist. Call it honor among thieves but there is a realworld US copyright law that seems to reflect this.

    Yadda ya, you don't live in the US so wah wah wah.
     
  22. visualove

    visualove New Member

    Some specific suggestions...

    Reach out through your networks to get friends, friends of friends, to shoot the footage you need in remote places. Send them a simple release so you own or both own the footage. Do the same for others who need footage in your city. Big cities have art schools with creative people and the equipment to compress the footage.

    You can use the stock photo companies to research locations, then send your friends to shoot video there.

    I wouldn't be surprised if a photographer would trade licensed use for some kind of video edited montage/ pan and scan of their work.
     
  23. vj_jasper

    vj_jasper imagination

    i still think there is a case for the VJ to be praised as a Cultural Selektor ... mixing, grooving, doin' it like a sex machine. non-stop cultural flow, the images are on show but they are not for sale, the VJ is having fun but not claiming ownership, etc etc yada yada... tagging live sketches over digital flashes, they create new art out of light, never top be seen quite the same again, and the DJ mixes the smooth rich phat frequencies and beats.

    i do agree that the best way of sampling another 'fellow artist's' work is with their permission. they would usually be into it if you explain your intentions, and a quicktime mov and some footage would be the bonus.

    the idea of sampling from movies being okay yet if sampling fellow artists requiring license agreement is a valid point.
    however could be brought into question if the VJ was to assume the Cultrual Selector stance. as in... not only are they above the copyright laws as a Mixer and Presentor of Kulture, they are actually to be given gr8 creds for taking that generous position.

    if Warhol got in trouble for mixing in other ppl's images to his art, well, that is related, however we are talking Produkt here, and that is a different thing alltogether from a Service.

    a Service is ephemeral, of-the-moment
    a Product is forever and sells even while you are on holiday

    if the question was, 'is it okay to include this in a dvd product', rather than 'is it cool to mix with this live?' .. well, there is a difference, however conceptual.

    still, nice to ask permission, and is a good vibe to do so.
     
  24. bass

    bass New Member

    i thought istock was a bit expensive to me :/ , but i like them the most out of all stock photos.... yeah they got video now, and have a video-contest if anyone is interested you can win a camera! ;)

    so many points were mentioned, and each is an aspect...

    totally!.

    and i think we all agree on the persmission and "blessing"...

    but i think the copy right issue should not stand in the way... if you find an image that fits your way of going in a certain way and cant find the author or anything, then use it and dont worry much...

    whats more important is the art in my opinion, than claiming this is mine or yours... the transmission i will call it ;)

    to that i would like to add this definition (maybe slightly off topic) Authorship, (in the case of the 'graphic' designer here)
    the involvement of the designer in the meditation of the message to an audience. (not that theres a particular message neccessarily in a vj's work, but i would say the personal music translation or visualising)
    it can be argued that through the creation of visual messages, the designer has an equal role to play in the ways in which a piece of visual communication is read as the originator of the content of the message. ... some design theorists have borrowed the notion of auteur from film theory in an attempt to build on this notion, while others have been provoked into a heated response which foregrounds the neutral role of the gaphic designer within the commercial arena.

    when the vj is using any art piece, in his set, this image will be part of the whole, and it would be changed in the way it is percieved.. from originally..and it is up to the dj how to use it, thats another thing...

    but anyway i think the best best solution is to take the footage yourself!!!

    or hehe commenting on 2lb, thers a quote i forgot that says sth like: steal but dont copy art!

    and cultural presenter is a good way to put it too..

    cheers..
     
  25. deepvisual

    deepvisual visually challenged

  26. john01

    john01 5 quids worth of italics

    Someone may have already pointed this out but the first photo of the people on the train is a no-no. You should not use anything without a release form which shows a member of the public if they are recognisable. The photographer is probably breaking this rule here.
     
  27. bass

    bass New Member

    thank you for pointing that out john! : oops: nearly forgot that!

    deepvisual :cheers:
     
  28. 2lb

    2lb photoshop pimp

    I like that word 'recontextualisation' Holly, that's a new one to me! :lol2: I suppose I always consider context and provenance. I have never actually played to an audience (yet), that is why I am here - to learn about technology, techniques and of course copyright issues.

    I think (in my inncoence) time is also an issue.

    To wit: - A single frame of architecture may occupy 1/25th of a second on the big screen, an Ali punch maybe a quarter of a second to get the mesage across. However I once took a piece of Metropolis anime, some screens (maybe 10 frames) and applied a plugin to kaleidoscope/spin it around and made a few seconds of interesting footage for a video.

    bass, speaking as perhaps Devil's advocate: I have a video I produced/edited/designed for a uk techno outfit, it plays on a Sky tv channel literally all of the time . I have never received a penny in royalties or even an email, the tv station simply cut off my credits and nicked it. Am i happy? difficult one, but yes I suppose I am... some people may not feel the same in my position

    and that quote 'great artists steal' , horrendous, terrible and life influencing!!! i love it, it colours all my judgement, he he he:jester:
     

Share This Page