What is plagiarism?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Travis Nunn

Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
1,601
Location
Midlothian, VA
Format
Medium Format
Well, what do you do when you've been working on a series for a book for 2 or 3 years and then you discover someone else has already done something similar? So similar in fact that 3 or 4 prints are almost interchangeable. That's the issue I'm looking at now.

I know I didn't plagiarize him because I had no knowledge of his work until well after I started, I'm not worried about that, but still the fact remains that if someone were to compare the two, it would make me look like I took his ideas and copied them. How do you deal with that situation?

My apologies to Aggie, I don't mean to try and hijack your thread, but I've been bothered by this for a while and this seems like a good place to bring it up.
 

copake_ham

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
4,091
Location
NYC or Copak
Format
35mm

If you independently arrived at the idea or concept - then you're not plagarising.

On a much less grand scale, I had a similar experience a year or so ago. During some beautiful, if icy cold winter days, I took to wandering around the Columbia County countryside ( where Copake is) and shoot the exterior of the many clapboard churches.

I was framing a shot outside one on a bright Sunday PM. The minister came out and asked if I'd like to shoot the interior. I declined indicating that I was only interested in the exteriors.

Then she dropped the bomb: "You know, there's a photo book of Columbia County churches available. You can get it a the local bookstore in nearby Chatham!".

Not to say I was planning a book or something - but it rang home the fact that few "concepts" are original!
 

SuzanneR

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
5,977
Location
Massachusetts
Format
Multi Format

So true... there is very little truly original work out there.
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
Kirk Keyes said:
"Ahh, the Socratic Method in action..."
Click to expand...

But then again, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.

(Sorry for the pun... I think it is my own.)

((And another pun variation is: "You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead." Stan Laurel))
 

tim rudman

Member
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
694
Format
Medium Format
Kirk Keyes said:
But then again, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think.
((And another pun variation is: "You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead." Stan Laurel))
Click to expand...

Or even
'You can lead a whore to water but you cannot make her think'

or was it
'you can lead a whore to the alter but you cannot make her think' - ??
Dorothy Parker ?? - Can't remember
 

livemoa

Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2003
Messages
434
Location
Was New Zeal
Format
Multi Format
tim rudman said:
Or even
'You can lead a whore to water but you cannot make her think'

or was it
'you can lead a whore to the alter but you cannot make her think' - ??
Dorothy Parker ?? - Can't remember
Click to expand...

The Dorothy Parker quote is "You can lead a whore to culture but you can't make her think". Ms Parker said this, when after addressing the American Horticultural society (I think, it was some Horticultural group) some one in the audience asked her to come up with something based on "horticulture".
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
tim rudman said:
"To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism, to steal ideas from many is research."
Anon

or
'Genius is merely undiscovered plagiarism'
(Wilde?)
Click to expand...

when one researches a topic and uses the ideas of one or many, they usually give credit with a footnote/endnote.

aggie, would you have been upset if whoever this person/s was/were had a footnote at the end of the artice notating where their ideas came from? seems that it is only the right thing to do ...
 
OP
OP

Aggie

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2003
Messages
4,914
Location
So. Utah
Format
Multi Format

No it wouldn't have upset me then. I chose to freely give out that information here on apug. I shared it with the world sort of speak. What irked me after the fact was the blatant use of almost verbatim my wording of the process in the said article and the claim that that person made that they came up with it. Yet I'm not as upset over what happened to me as what happened to the person accused of stealing the other ones style. I'm outraged for them. What has transpired was unconciousanable (still can't spell worth a damn) Especially when a third apugger gave insturction to the one doing the accusing on that very subject that now is again being claimed as their rehlm. It is a person out of control who yes is working hard at self promotion, but is doing it at the expense of those who taught them in the first place, and now is accusing someone who might be viewed as competition. That I think is sleazy! Especially when it drives that person to tears and of the other website rather than fight it. They do not have my ability to take care of myself. So for them I made the choice to ask the greater community here what is plagarism? Since ya'll in many ways have also helped that same person learn photography. I am hoping that this makes the point it is intended to do. Teach us about ethics and what is plagarisim, and hopefully teaches the one who promted all of this, that people will stand up and not take the crap when it is sleazy. So that is my last post on this. I do think we need to be careful in our dealings and treat all fairly until such times as it is unfair and deserves mention. I want all to be happy and do well and grwo as photographers. I've told how crappy of a photographer I am, so I make no asertions I can do well. If I can help I pass on what I know. This is what apug is about, passing on and sharing our knowledge. It should be a win win situation for all. It should not be about tearing another apart to further yourself.
 

Roger Hicks

Member
Joined
May 17, 2006
Messages
4,895
Location
Northern Aqu
Format
35mm RF
tim rudman said:
Or even
'You can lead a whore to water but you cannot make her think'

or was it
'you can lead a whore to the alter but you cannot make her think' - ??
Dorothy Parker ?? - Can't remember
Click to expand...

Dear Tim,

I believe it was horticulture (and indeed dear Doth).

Will you be at photokina?

Cheers

R
 

tim rudman

Member
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
694
Format
Medium Format
(Excuse me snipping pieces from your quote Aggie)
The reality is that this does happen and can be upsetting of course, but I think personally it is better to accept that if you publish, you will sooner or later see you processes - and yes even you words and phrases - reappearing under other names. Accept it a a sad reality and move on - life is too short.
Ideally, accreditation should always be given, but it does (intentionally or not) get ommitted at times.

The reverse is also true though. There is not so very much new and original work. I have 'found' new processes quite often from my own experiments only to find at a later date that not surprisingly others have been there and done that long before I did. It happens. learn what you need to from it and move on
Tim
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
And your process isn't in Tim's book? Good job!
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
Is this the bleaching after selenium toning thing?
 

tim rudman

Member
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
694
Format
Medium Format
Kirk Keyes said:
Is this the bleaching after selenium toning thing?
Click to expand...

No Kirk, (if you are referring to the so called 'Chinese Prints' as I suspect??) I certainly didn't discover that process. I heard of it via China Hamilton and also Liam Lawless - both of whom I credited for the process when I wrote it up in the Toning Book.

I have 'discovered' a number of processes over the years though, through my own experimentations. Some of these I have subsequently found are not in fact unknown, although they weren't known to me. Others are as far as I know still 'original' to me - but I take the view now that almost nothing is really new as people like me and many others are constantly re-inventing the wheel and making their own discoveries. So I never any longer claim that any of my stuff is new - because who knows? I share it where I can and much of it will be new to many people and occasionally someone will direct me to a reference where a process was written up decades ago! That's OK. What really matters is the sharing of knowledge so that it never gets lost from one generation to another. Nobody can read everything!
Tim
 

haris

Plagiarism is not only "copiying" of final result and not give a credit to "original", "copiying" work process and not give credit to original inventor of process is also plagiarism.

Example: there is one photographer who was famous during 1970ies and 1980ies, David Hamilton. I will not go into his subject choice, but he developed specific technique to get final result. There were many competitions in which photographers tried to "copy" his results. In all competitions were clearly stated that goal of competition is to get photograph as simillar as possibile to Hamilton's. Then there were and are zillions of discussions about his technique. What is in matter, he keeps his technique as secret. And everyone in the world knows that he is inventor of that technique. So, when one see photograph that have that look, one say "It is Hamilton's photo, or it is copy of Hamilton's photograph".

So, having exhibition on photograph which looks like his (regrding subject, posing and final result) and not give credit to him is clear plagiarism.

Then, having exhibitions of photographs which are completely different from Hamilton's regarding subject, posing, etc... but if photographs are made using Hamilton's technique and not giving credit to him, is also plagiarism.

We all know that, for example, in computer industry, digital imaging industry to make discussion closer to us, there are some standardised processes. Let say intepolation of resolution to make image bigger retaining same quality of image. So, one day one man or one team of people, developed mathematical algorithm for resolution interpolation. Every image manipulation software maker must pay author rights to that man or team of people if they want to use that algorithm. If they include same algorithm into their software and not pay and give credit to inventor of algoritm it would be plagiarism and breaking of law regarding protecting of author rights.

So, working processes can be subject of plagiarism and if someone tells to other person about some work process, and that other person use that process and claim it is his/hers invention, and especially if make profit using that process, and not have explicite permit to do that of original inventor of process, it is plagiarism and criminal act.

Regards
 

haris

Next, film photography is more or less "clear" of that legal stuff because French government after buying rights for processes included in photography, gave processes to the world, that is, everyone has right to use them without paying or giving credit to inventor.

In digital imaging, when one buys imaging manipulation software he or she pays right for using of all processes (mathematical algoritms) included. That is why user of software don't have to pay or give credit to inventors of included algorithms or maker(s) of software in whole when make his/hers image using that software.

But, if one develop new process using combination of different processes or parts of processes, and especially if result of that development is specific result, in this case "look" of photograph, then that person is inventor of that process.

Of course, problem is that different persons or teams of people can develop simillar or even same process independently of each other. Then, like in science, that man or team of people who first "publish" process is to be considered as inventor of process.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,533
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format

Quite interesting perspective on plagiarism. Re: Hamilton, check out his book "Homage a la Peinture"... if I'm not mistaken he doesn't credit the painter/painting from which he drew his inspiration.
 

Ole

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2002
Messages
9,245
Location
Bergen, Norway
Format
Large Format
I'm locking this thread. I think it's done enough damage.

If you really wish to carry on the "discussion", please take it offline.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…