There was an interesting conversation at my photography clubs latest meet (& please don't turn this into a photography Club bash fest), about taking pictures of others art. It appears that of late, judges have been marking down images which have been taken of others art, even in public. What was said that if an image was just a straight photo of an art work (& again, I add, in a public place), such as taking a straight on picture of a statue, that it was a breach of copy right and plagiarism. They did also state that if the image was taken at a different angle, or a part shot, or there was some other element in the image that was not to do with the art, that it would be OK. I, though, did argue back, that if we were to take a picture of a building, then if the same logic applies, are we not then breaching the copy right of the architect? I would like to know other peoples views.