What's Your Take on Cabbyjohn's Question?

[ABERS]

Looking at the Gallery this morning there is a picture that sings out above the usual procession of pets, birds, family portraits and general landscapes. Cabbyjohn's shot of a section of knitted fabric. He asks the question, "Is this cheating?".

When you take such a shot there is always a tinge of guilt that you are only recording someone else's creativity. Does this apply to the recording of architecture, statuary, graffiti etc.?

Of course you are doing exactly that, but you are putting your slant on it in terms of how you see it, so that makes it a valid image in my eyes. The fact that John tells us it's a section of the whole certainly makes it so.

What's your take on his question?

[jinky]

I don`t see any photograph as cheating in any real sense. Sure if you take a photo of someone else`s work and pass it off as your own for whatever motive it can be but if it is just taken as a record to keep as a memory for yourself as having been there then why not? I sometimes think people get very precious about photographs and do wonder about your own terminology of "the usual procession of ....". I am not sure if cabbyjohns does stand out above others - it`s just another record of another time. It may be as precious to him at that moment in time as say my image is to my family of what is probably the last Mothers day picture of my girls with nana Joyce - more so say if it had been a piece of his own / own family`s work. The thing is only the photographer knows if that image is precious or just a snap in time. With "things" made by others I am not sure how often we do indeed put our own slant on things or simply capture what is there and has been made. I do believe it is possible to put a different interpretation on such by inventive angles / backgrounds/ foregrounds / macro work  focusing on one element etc but all too often they are recordings of what is there.

[Graham]

   Yes that pic caught my eye as well.
   "Is it cheating?"

     Short answer...Don't know, don't care!

     Slightly longer answer... I don't know whether the scene was presented as an artwork in it's own right but it looks to me as though Cabby's isolated a section of it to present as a photo'. This would have involved making at least a framing judgment.
     I suppose it falls in to the category of Still Life and I imagine that Cabby didn't create the arrangement. Is that an issue? (See short answer.)
     How many Landscape photographers "arrange" the scene in front of them?

[ABERS]

I sometimes think people get very precious about photographs and do wonder about your own terminology of "the usual procession of ....".

The thing is only the photographer knows if that image is precious or just a snap in time. With "things" made by others I am not sure how often we do indeed put our own slant on things or simply capture what is there and has been made.

If every picture taken is precious to the photographer that's great, for the photographer in question.

By the remark 'the usual procession of....' I'm only saying that there is very little breadth of subject within the images posted on the gallery and I listed those that appear on a regular basis, I forgot to add flowers.

The very fact that cabbyjohn had spotted something out of the norm makes it stand out.

[Cabbyjohn]

Thank you for your comments on the Fabric photo. I was quite pleased with it. The strange thing is as a 70 year old snapper rather than a "photographer", I am usually disappointed with the majority of my results. However on my visit to the art gallery I hadn't taken my Panasonic FZ150 with me.  I saw what to me looked like rolls of carpet protruding from a frame, took out my mobile phone and took the photo when there was a gap in the hordes of schoolchildren milling about the gallery. After downloading my results I was surprised at the clarity of pics taken using a phone. I have put lots more effort into taking pictures with my "proper camera" without being as pleased with the result as I was with this one. I shall post the original fabric photo in order you can see what I mean. 

[jinky]

Overuse of the word "precious" by me there 

No Abers I wasn`t saying every picture taken was precious just that only the photographer may  really knows if a particular one is or not. Of course the ones we may all be aiming for are the massive impact ones that stand out by either capturing an emotion or a moment never to be repeated. Must admit I`ve rarely managed that. Yes cabbyjohn it`s surprised me a couple of times what I can get with my mobile - just wish mine was better quality. Nice colour and shape in your image. I guess what might move it into the precious field for you would be if you wife / child etc had produced  the art work.

[Andrew]

I think for me, the answer comes down to how close to the original is the new image, and what its intended use is.

If some one is not being deprived of revenue from a modified take on their art, then i don't get too upset. In such matters, it could be seen as flattering and advertising the original piece - so long as the original version is credited to the correct photographer/ arrtist.

I think ultimately, it does no harm just to drop the artist/ photographer a line and show what you have done and ask if they have any objections - don't think many will get too upset...