Belle OHara wrote:
Recently, I was going through the unedited shots that a photographer and friend had given me from several shoots we have done together, and saw several that had a lot of potential for finshed images, but I knew there was next to no hope of him editing them and if he does, it will be more to showcase his own ability than me as the model or my ability, so another friend and photographer of mine and I decided to recreate these looks in his studio so that we could both play with them and actually have them to use for both of our portfolios.  However, I am not sure if I should tell the other photographer about recreating these looks, because he gets very teritorial about things he has shot and might demand that I not use them even though he did not shoot the ones that have been edited, simply because they look almost exactly like the ones he took.  I have finished a couple of them and would love to put them up, but again, I am not sure what to do.  Any advice or suggestions would be great.

I understand what you say about photogs being very territorial and it's true. It's also true that most of that comes from weak egos. So if he gets mad - he gets mad - so what? Last time I checked no one can demand anything of you unless they were in some sort of law enforcement.

That photg needs to understand that there is nothing new under the sun and he certainly doesn't own the rights to a theme.

Moreover, you and another photographer couldn't reprodce the setting 100% anyway. There's always a different point of view, point of perception, and overall tone. These things make a big difference.

So if he gets mad - oh well.

MHana wrote:
Go on a commercial or even editorial shoot and see how often this happens.

This is not all that uncommon.

Seriously?  I'm glad to hear that...recreating them gives me the chance to work on my PS skills with shots that I love and it gives the second photographer who has been a good friend of mine for a long time the chance to challenge himself and grow by attempting to recreate the work I have done with someone who's been doing it for a loooong time. Cool...I'll get the pics up soon, hopefully.  Just a little tweaking left to do. Thanks.

Belle OHara wrote:

Seriously?  I'm glad to hear that...recreating them gives me the chance to work on my PS skills with shots that I love and it gives the second photographer who has been a good friend of mine for a long time the chance to challenge himself and grow by attempting to recreate the work I have done with someone who's been doing it for a loooong time. Cool...I'll get the pics up soon, hopefully.  Just a little tweaking left to do. Thanks.

I said it happens,  I did not say it was the right thing to do.

Belle OHara wrote:
My mistake...I misunderstoode what you said.  I guss I just don't get how recreating work that I have done previously is wrong...any explination is welcome.

do not copy,  combine and make it new.


If looking at new ads then go to the book store or library and combine the new ideas with those of the past.  Not just the most famous but many images ignored in so many magazines,   old vogues from the 30,  40's, 50's, or 60's, 

I have a large collection of spin magazines and almost every issue of Interview magazine.

If you like an idea combine it with another and this is how you will find your style.

For the consistent end product will be your vision not just a copy.

00siris wrote:
I understand what you say about photogs being very territorial and it's true. It's also true that most of that comes from weak egos. So if he gets mad - he gets mad - so what? Last time I checked no one can demand anything of you unless they were in some sort of law enforcement.

I agree about the whole territorial thing.  I can remember times I'd tell a photographer I've shot with that I have a shoot coming up with a certain photog., and they'll be like "Who is the photographer?," "What are you guys shooting?," etc. 

Anyway, getting back to the situation here...like 00siris said, if the photographer gets mad, oh well.  You even said that the photographer probably won't edit the pics anyway, so why leave them "as is" when you know someone who's capable of making them even better?  I did a shoot recently that I PAID FOR, and in that time I had to wait to get the damn CD in the mail, you would think the photog. would've edited some pics like he's SUPPOSED TO.  Nope...it was a CD of raw images, so I had to do all the editing myself.  Some of the photos from that shoot are on my MM page and my OMP page, and no I don't have his name listed in the photo credits because I don't think he deserves to be credited for what I did.  When I left him messages (phone/e-mail) kindly asking him to edit some of the pics, he never even called/e-mailed me back.  So do I think that I was wrong for editing my pics that he took?  HELL NO.  He didn't give me what I paid for, but I'm definitely not gonna just let some raw images sit there and go unnoticed and "unposted" (online)...lol, and I think I did a good job with editing the pics myself.

ChristerArt wrote:
You don't state if you had a contract spelling out what he was supposed to do - I presume you didn't - it was a CD shoot, right?

OK, what you did comes under the heading of "stealing someone else's work" - and the courts don't look kindly on that.

I realize this probably will never come to that point as most here are not pros,but as a photographer, I myself would never do this - it's basically stealing someone else's work - and I won't do that - and I have to much pride to copy the work of others..

Neither do I condone him not answering your emails - I presume as you say, they were nicely worded.

This email illustrates the problem with handing someone a CD with all the raw images. Just one of the reasons I never do this - as the photographer/creator of the images I make sure I have full control of them - and only give finished images as part of whatever compensation is agreed upon - never a raw cd of the whole shoot.

And I copyright all my images - after every shoot - and I defend my work - in other words - if someone steals my work - or copy it to the extent that it's clearly using one of my images as a "master" for a copy - I will certainly take appropriate action - or rather, my attorney will - and have.

As for territorial "egos" - only those who know they are deficient as a photographer are insecure enough to be that way - pros don't care a flying hoot whoever else you shoot with - as long as you produce what they want or look for when you work with them. None of us shoot like the other so we simply don't care. My best friend is a photographer - we share everything we learn and we both are better off because of it.

But we don't copy each others images - even if we decide to do a project where we both shoot the same thing/model - the images still come out totally different - so we don't copy.

Still, what *you* did was wrong - whatever *you* think - *you* have no right to either copy/recreate or change the images this guy shot and gave you - and that you have no qualms about doing this tells is very telling - and it is sad to read that "photographers" here on this site think it is ok. Not much pride in their own images, I think if they think it's ok for another photographer to redo/reshoot *their* work so as to make it *better*..

Well Stated "CHristerArt"... you should have just did a new and BETTER shoot, never duplicating (on purpous)

Lens N Light wrote:
Go for it. Nobody owns a copyright on a look. How many of the photographers on MM have you heard say that they keep mags around to show models how to pose for their shots? What you are doing is the same thing except you are using images of yourself.

No, but they own the copyright on that IMAGE - and copying that image is copyright infringement - if YOU as a PHOTOGRAPHER doesn't know that or don't care - oh boy...

ChristerArt wrote:
No, but they own the copyright on that IMAGE - and copying that image is copyright infringement - if YOU as a PHOTOGRAPHER doesn't know that or don't care - oh boy...

Oh dear.  Physically copying an image might be a copyright infringement, but copying a pose, lighting set-up, etc., isn't.  Which is what the guy said.

Belle OHara wrote:
simply because they look almost exactly like the ones he took.  I have finished a couple of them and would love to put them up, but again, I am not sure what to do.  Any advice or suggestions would be great.

Few things. First, this is my opinion and how I do things.
The photographer has every right to be territorial over his/her work (not the models, but the work).

Put the shoe on the other foot. Let's say he shot you. Then he turns around and does almost the same exact thing with a model that looks almost exactly like you, but she's a different girl. Think about it before you burn a bridge with your "friend".