Flattery or theft?

ari -

sorry to hear of your troubles.
for years my ideas and work has been stolen from under my feet ...
( so i know how you feel )

why don't you approach the person who snatched
your image with YOURS and ask him what he thinks about it ...

another thing might be to see if you can find some more "commercialized" work
to do, that will pay the bills and your artwork for you.

commercialized == bread+butter work ( editorial or newspaper portraits, architectural photos &C using whatever medium the client needs ) ...

yeah, it stinks thinking you " sold out " just to make a living ...

I'm sorry to hear about your trouble. To my UNTRAINED eyes there are similarities but there aren't enough of it to call it a theft of ideas. Essentially, both are low key photo of a man with angel's wing. Other than that, other elements are different.

Camera angles are different, arm positions are substantially different, one is nude, the other isn't. There are just as many differences as there are similarities.

When someone posts an image for public to see, either at public gallery or website, he or she takes certain risk that his or her good ideas will be assimilated to someone else to produce yet another product.

The bottom line is this..... even if you assert his work is a copy of yours, your claim is useless unless you actually enforce it - quite often in court of law. Often expensive and lengthy endeavor, and results are quite uncertain.

Ari,
I really enjoy seeing your images. You have talent and a good eye. Consider the struggles of someone like Edward Weston. How many serious photographers go through this? Whatever it is that you do in life, you have to enjoy it or unhappiness will follow. The creative process takes time and energy and that time and energy could be directed at something like making a living, but then you wouldn't be making images that please you. I wish you all the best.
Dave

Andy K said:

Perhaps you need to forget the money and name. Why give a shit what other people think, just do what pleases you photographically.

Click to expand...

Very comforting words and sounds logical, but I cannot fully agree. Photography is a visual art. Part of the artist's reward is viewer appreciation. Just pleasing yourself gets old after a while, and doesn't help improving one's own photography.

I suggest a different approach.

Select about a dozen of your best images. Have them professionally mounted and framed, and find a place to display them for a day. Now, while people observe your images, you observe them. What images attract their attention first? Which capture their interest the longest, and which lose their interest quickly or aren't even looked at? Make note of it.

This little exercise will tell you which of your images are well received and which aren't. Now, compare your 'good' ones with the 'bad' ones, and find out what the difference is. This will be very revealing and guide you into the right direction to improve your photography.

Don't go as far as making pictures for the taste of the masses. They have to be your images. Don't change your style if you have one, but use the exercise to hone your style and skill, and find out what makes a great image.

Wise words, Ralph.

I photograph primarily for myself -- but not to please myself, but to challenge myself. Photography is the vehicle I use to move forward. And as with anything that challenges oneself, one will have failures and periods of infuriating stagnation.

I do not mind if someone tells me that my work stinks -- I would just prefer if some sort of reason is also added. In the case of the images you presented, I would prefer to know if the statement was made due to the Angel-wing Cliche, the lighting, or perhaps a bit of homophobia.

Vaughn

Ari,

I get into states like you seem to be in. I have to wonder whether your issues might be more generally existential, but expressed through your relationship to photography. Mine are. When it happens - and it frequently does - I need some way to put it into some sort of larger perspective that takes it away from the personal. When it is focused on the personal, I just feel bad about myself, which is just self pity. No fun, and it's unproductive.

One thing I've found helpful, even though I ain't exactly what you would call "religious" in any conventional sense, is to read Ecclesiastes. It's a hoot. He's even more cynical than I am, and manages to take existential angst 'way up into the universal human experience. For me, it makes my personal stuff funny. He rails about the ubiquitous presence of vanity. That has amazing application in looking at the world of photography, which is a great reservoir of vanity (if not narcissism).

And, there are fun things like "He who pisseth against the wall".

Actually, I don't know how it ever got into the canon. It never seems to me there is anything religious in it at all. I think it must have been written about photography. I've been thinking it might be time to read it again.

Vaughn said:

Usually, it is not considered polite to tell other members here that one of their images "stink".

Click to expand...

The OP asked if it was flattery or theft. He did not say that one of the pix was his...or much of anything, for that matter. I don't think I should apologize, but I will say that I honestly thought it was just a curious question about two photos he had found, and I probably would not have said it if I knew one of them was his (unless we already had a friendly, joking relationship with each other).

Also, perhaps I should stop assuming that anyone who has Internet access also has a sense of humor anything like mine. Seriously, folks. Who would say what I said in 100% dead seriousness?

Since Ari is cool with it, no problem.

I was not sure if one of the images was Ari's either, so I looked before I leapt. Always good to do in such situations. It was not difficult to trace the bottom image to Ari via his posted website link. And we are all aware, (or should be) that emotion can difficult to convey in a one line of written words. Obviously my words were also taken more seriously then intended -- "Usually" was not a strong enough modifier. My bad...(which means, I am sorry).

I didn't want this thread to be one of my usual "help the troubled artist/beginning professional", but I do appreciate all who contributed and rest assured that your words have been read and digested well.