Capture: Howling at the Moon
163 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Newer→ Last
-
Lilith __, in reply to
Isn’t the threshold for re-using someone else’s photo 10%? ie. up to 10% of your picture may be borrowed from another image?
10%, as far as I know, is not enshrined in legislation or common law.
Huh. And I was taught that in a class at design school, too!
This seems to be the US situation:
Can't I take an image and change it to make it mine?
No. Because one of the exclusive rights granted under copyright is the individual right of the copyright owner to create derivative works from their original copyrighted material.
Modifying or altering an image is infringing upon the copyright owner's rights unless expressed permission is granted or the modification falls under fair use (which is highly unlikely).
In a few court cases, a modified image was not considered infringement because the original image was no longer recognizable due to the extent and variety of the alterations.
Altering or modifying published works is strongly not recommended because most artists, writers, musicians, photographers, etc., can recognize their own work even through modifications.
Many people believe the "myth" that if they change an existing image a percentage (10%, 30%, etc.), then they can legally use the image. Be advised: that is not the law.
-
Last night somewhere in between Auckland and Wellington, up above the clouds :)
-
a few seconds later.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
I guess they have an acceptable level of urban collateral damage that they will tolerate, just what does become of any plane they shoot down over a densely populated area?
I was thinking about this last night and the thought that came to me was that all this military hardware in a city the size of London is more likely to encourage a terrorist attack than discourage one.
If a suicide bomber were to hijack a small plane and fly low around the city in a threatening manner, then the crossfire from rockets and guns would cause more damage, physical and political, than any improvised device could. -
Wobbly moon.
-
Over the top moon
-
Jackie Clark, in reply to
Oh Alex, those are stunning. Just beautiful.
-
JacksonP, in reply to
Last night somewhere in between Auckland and Wellington, up above the clouds :)
Amazing. Also, if I'd known you were going to be in Auckland, would have been nice to meet you. Or were you on the way here?
-
Islander, in reply to
-and the ferns are releasing their fragile purchase on moonlight and sending scent greetings as it rises into the open sky…*
(*Ferns actually do release more scent at full-moon-)
-
Ross Mason, in reply to
Any syzygy that's closer than 406,450 - 44,547 or 361,903 km would be by definition a Super Moon, in accordance to Richard Nolle, the astrologer gets credit for coining the phrase.
Gag.
You read this I hope...not??
But wait. Has anyone noticed this new http://www.stuff.co.nz/science Stuff Science section.
Holy rationality Batman!! But the horrorscopes have a bigger font.......
-
Lilith __, in reply to
up above the clouds :)
Alex these are wonderful. And for once the scratchiness of the aeroplane window actually adds something -- it scatters the moonlight most pleasingly!
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Gag.You read this I hope…not??
My point was that even astrologers know this was an annual event, not some amazing once in a lifetime event as "The Media" would have us believe.
You'll have me spouting explanations of homœopathy next.
Oh, hang on...Law of similars
Hahnemann observed from his experiments with cinchona bark, used as a treatment for malaria, that the effects he experienced from ingesting the bark were similar to the symptoms of malaria. He therefore decided that cure proceeds through similarity, and that treatments must be able to produce symptoms in healthy individuals similar to those of the disease being treated.
A bit like Inoculation using highly diluted or weakened stuff to improve the immune system, like what don't kill ya makes you tough, to paraphrase Friedrich Nietzsche.
Next up. Placebos , are they addictive?<the devil made me do it>
x;-) -
Russell Brown, in reply to
Last night somewhere in between Auckland and Wellington, up above the clouds :)
Godammit Alex, you even take great opportunist airplane window snaps.
-
Yesterday afternoon, down at Whakatane harbour. It’s the sun, not the moon, but it seems to fit the mood of the moon images.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
That's a lovely photo Russell. I like the sun (understatement coming from an Aztec ). It allows for more difference than the Moon. The Moon, well, it's just the Moon innit. The Sun, well, you got Sunrises and Sunsets and any time during the day. All sorts!
-
Alex Efimoff, in reply to
Oh Alex, those are stunning. Just beautiful.
Thanks Jackie :)
-
Alex Efimoff, in reply to
Amazing. Also, if I'd known you were going to be in Auckland, would have been nice to meet you. Or were you on the way here?
I am in Welly now, next time we should definitely catch up!
-
Alex Efimoff, in reply to
Alex these are wonderful. And for once the scratchiness of the aeroplane window actually adds something -- it scatters the moonlight most pleasingly!
It actually looked like a painting in reality and the view was just stunning.
-
Alex Efimoff, in reply to
I always keep my baby on my knees during the flight :)
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
I always keep my baby on my knees during the flight :)
And how is your exhibition going? I was pondering last night in light of this thread, how on your combining the pleasure of your pics with the exhibition and the offering to view here,how, it could really help sales of the real thing so I was hoping you are doing well down in Wellington.
-
Alex Efimoff, in reply to
it could really help sales of the real thing so I was hoping you are doing well down in Wellington.
Well, to me it's not about the sales at the moment.. Portraiture is a specific genre, not many people want to have a face on their lounge room wall. It happens only if the photographer is famous as well as the subject in the photo. So, that's more about building own profile as a portraiture photographer which is able to handle complex tasks and present a person in _the best_ way. What I am looking for is more recognisable public faces to be photographed by me. It's a matter of time, not sales in my case :)
And of course the time gives me a chance to develop my style and technique. -
Steve Barnes, in reply to
I always keep my baby on my knees during the flight :)
As long as you keep it quiet, damn kids, get off my lawn.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
And of course the time gives me a chance to develop my style and technique.
Well that's everything in life innit. You have a great eye for the photography thing and I trust you will make a living from it . I know what you mean about portraiture being specific to the buyer and seller but don't underestimate the pleasure from your other shots. Best of luck going forward. { :)
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
You feelin' lucky punk?
damn kids, get off my lawn.
Careful, you're invoking the spirit of The Man
- Clint Eastwood Kodak...*
:- )(not that he's dead yet, but Eastman Kodak
has been mauled by a Kodiak bear market...) -
Rather than comparing someone using your photos to theft/'borrowing' of physical property, I think a better analogy is discovering that your flatmate has been using your toothbrush on the sly. The toothbrush hasn't been stolen -- it's still there in the bathroom when you want to use it, and it's probably not going to materially harm you to keep using it, and maybe it really was an accident, but they've reduced the value of that toothbrush to you, and you'd still be justified in getting angry. You, as the owner of the toothbrush, should have a say about whose mouth it goes into.
I still think the best solution is to gently but firmly educate media outlets when they make these mistakes. Most of them gank photos (uncredited, usually) off Twitter because they're in a rush and honestly don't know any better. On Monday I did a quick straw poll of friends who work as journalists, and none of their workplaces had a policy about using images from social media, and none of them could recall covering the topic in the Grad Dip Journalism. It's largely left to the discretion of individual journalists/editors who in all likelihood picked up their knowledge of copyright and fair dealing in the playground. I've met altogether too many qualified, professional journalists who honestly believe that everything on the internet is "in the public domain". Like the pervasive myths about the 10% threshold and those ridiculous "no copyright infringement intended" notices on Youtube, these myths and rules of thumb get passed around the office in place of anything more official and accurate. If we want things to change, we need to assert domain over our own toothbrushes, and tell media outlets when they cross the line.
If the Herald had asked first, I'd wager that most people would have actually been quite chuffed. They could have checked who had taken the photo at the same time, to make sure that everything was cited correctly and all the photos were genuine. Instead, the collection dwindled from fourteen photos (most of them posted by local Twitter users) to nine, almost all of them from the Associated Press. One of the photos turned out to be from a French artist's book and wasn't even of the 'supermoon'. I wonder how much Herald staff time was wasted sorting out the mess.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.