When does inspiration goes wrong
We all know the saying “this image was done inspired by”.
Normally on the blog I will post topics containing technique, images, videos etc. but today I want to try something new, let’s interact.
I think it’s almost impossible to do something really 100% unique, something that has never ever been done, we see this in Hollywood and in a lot of areas, there are some amazing new products, movies, images etc. but making something 100% unique, something that has never before been tried, or done I think is almost impossible. And of course I also have my inspirations, photographers like David Lachapelle, Erwin Olaf, Mario Testino etc. they all are influencing my work and when you know it you can probably see it in most of my shots, however I also live by the rule that you should always try to improve your work or the work you are using as inspiration, and by improving I more mean change it so it fits your vision, or to make it your own.
Over the last few years I’ve had several photographers mailing me images from photographers emulating/copying images I made over the years. One record holder got over 15 images on his website that were not only influenced by my work but were 100% copies of something I did, same poses, same theme, same clothing etc. for me it fell under the name not inspired but shamelessly copied 😀
And this was something that was clear, however recently I also talked with a photographer that went almost bezerk because someone had copied and image from him and a model…. when I looked at the image I was a bit surprised… I could literally find hundreds of images that looked similar and all were shot way before he did it. In fact the image was a model lying on a bed with a window behind her in a pose that is used maybe 1000’s of times.
What I meant with this example is that sometimes a copy will not look like a 100% copy but more like something that is similar, and in fact maybe the photographers don’t know each other, or never saw the theme. I myself experienced something like this some years ago and it had a major impact on the way I handle this kind of things. I did a photoshoot on a junkyard with a model and posted them online on the website Luminous landscapes…. within a few days I got a mail with loads of “bad” words claiming I copied this photographers unique work, to be honest I never heard of the guy and when visiting his site the only thing similar I could find was a photoshoot on a car junkyard. Well let’s be honest there are maybe millions of shoots done on car junkyards, just google it and you will see a lot. I tried to reason with the guy but to make a long story short for the coming 4-5 years I would be called a copycat online whenever he saw a post of my work. My remark that if someone made an image of a model in front of the Eiffel tower that no-one could ever make that image again. According to him that was different and eventually I just stopped defending myself, there was no way to label it as a copy except it was done in a similar location.
So the question for today…. where do YOU think the border lies for copying or inspiration ?
And did you ever experience something like this that really drove you nuts, loved or……
The borderline is not the location,the model or the light it is the creative use of it. When that is al the same
then you mention someone a copycat.I often see it when i trying to get people in the right place and composition
(photojounalist) then when i turned around to take the picture other photographers are already shooting.
That is when everybody thinks he or she is a photographer it annoys me that are my “copycats”
Frans
I have a lot of photographers in my area doing similar work to mine. I know we all shoot the same models and the same locations. Trying to get something totally unique can be a challenge some times. Because we live in such a small city, I have ways to help the models in these situations. I check their portfolios before we shoot and try and get them to do something that will be different. I also try not to watch what other local ph otographers are doing anymore. For a long time I felt like nobody here really shoots new things because we all just shoot what we see. It’s great to learn from your peers but it makes sense to me to learn from peers that are outside of my skill level. Rarely in Portland OR do photographers look outside of the city for education, inspiration and growth. (The ones that do, it’s apparent in their portfolios!)
Another photographer shooting the same portraits in the same locations doesn’t bother me anymore. What does bother me is when a photographer has a VERY specific style that they have been shooting for a year or 2 then soon (within a week or so) after meeting me and seeing someting I have done immediatly tryies it. There is one photograher in town specifically who does it. He was a “fashion photographer” when we met at a fashion show. He shot with a flash and his photos were flat and washed out with large shadows of the models showing on the ceiling of an overly illuminated room. He was sitting to my right during the show. I chose no flash and a super fast lens. I used the spotlight that was shining on the models and everything else was blacked out highlighting the model and the clothes only. The models all commented on my photos on facebook that mine were the best of the show… now, all of his shows are shot that way. Pbbbtttt….
Incidentally, I have a series of photos that I tried based on inspiration from one of your photos Frank. :0) You can tell me? Did I copy?
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150344027553585.355836.106549443584&type=1
Thanks for your input.
Taking over techniques is another thing I think. When I started doing live photography it was bad, really bad. When I saw Alen Hess working during a PSW pre-con it triggered a few things for me that I now use and it made me better as a live photographer (still a LONG way to go) I don’t see that as copying personally. We all learn better and faster ways along the road.
Gee Frank, if you have a long way to go then I surely have a tremendous journey ahead! 😉 I heard it said that a photographer doesn’t start being good until he or she breaks their first shutter. Nope, mine is still working…
Mine too 😀
Here is Socal it’s almost impossible to not do something similar to someone else. I see a lot of photographers try to copy pinup photographer Alvarado’s style int their images. And they’re clearly poorly done ripoffs of his unique editing style.
I’ve personally tried to emulate style of photographers myself in developing a newer, fresher or different look. However I try to keep all my images similar to my own style of shooting. If/when I create something that is too much like something else and think “oh, maybe I unconsciously copied that when I shot it” I’ll try to not use it.
But to answer your question… when it’s done in the same style, pose, lighting, wardrobe, location… it’s clearly a copy, you are definitely no longer inspired and are simply copying.
So I was a student and I made a photograph that was a potential for a postcard. One of the instructors who graduated two years before me said I copied her photo. Well, I had never seen her photo before.I didn’t go to college the same time and at the time I didn’t have a Facebook.I wasn’t in the world of photography yet.And I thought mine was still very different than her shot.Needless to say, her photo made the postcard.I’m an instructor at a college now and it’s amazing how many photographs through the years look like duplicates but are made from two different students. And as an instructor, you do have a lot of students emulating your work until they find their own style.Who are we to judge?
to be honest I never really mind when someone “copies” me, for me it’s a push to do even better next time.
The post was more meant as a discussion point.
Inspiration is one thing but to copy exactly everything is over the line, I feel. One could say that is a flattering thing to have someone try to reproduce your image, as I would like to do with George Hurrell’s work, but alas, those hair styles and clothing and photo reproduction techniques are of a long ago era, so identical reproduction is not possible. Unique photography is limited not to composition and lighting but to ones own imagination. I use others work to stimulate the ideas to come as I am really, really bad at starting from a blank canvas. I see where improvements can be made and work on that. Striving to be a perfectionist helps me find error in details that others don’t see and sometimes they see things I don’t. The worst someone can do is use an image from someone else and call it their own! I detest that! Or alter it and then say “I did it”.
In my eyes the difference between being inspired and copying is your own creativity. Of course every photographer is influenced by other photographers, filmmakers etc. We see pictures every day throughout our whole life and we take in these influences. Also it’s honorable to look at a photograph you like and to try to recreate it – in terms of trying to get the same kind of mood, light etc. But usually as a photographer you still add something of your own creativity to it, even if you recreate. Only when someone just copies an existing picture by (put it to the extreme) picking the same location, the same model, same pose etc. It’s an utter lack of creativity and plain copying. Then there’s no development nor an individual streak in the “remake”.
On the other hand I don’t see why a photographer should be offended to see someone took a similar shot. In general there are locations – you mentioned the scrapyard – that are ‘en vogue’ or iconic and get used often. Then also your usual model only can do so many new poses. Therefore there’s a fairly good chance to shoot the same ‘theme’ as another photographer without even knowing. Still it has your own angle.
Hoi Frank, Wanneer is het kopie? Ik heb er ook even over na zitten denken. Ik denk dat het pas een kopie is als je een foto hebt en hem letterlijk 1 op 1 na probeert te maken. In mijn optiek denk ik zoals je zelf ook zegt dat alles al eens geprobeerd is. En dan nog als jet het beeld niet kent zal het wel degelijk anders zijn. Zo dra je een inspiratie bron hebt zal je sneller die zelfde kant op gaan werken en dan nog zal het beeld anders zijn. Zelf voor een studie opdracht al eens een foto letterlijk na moeten maken. En ik moet zeggen dat is nog best lastig! Voor het leer proces is het denk goed om zo nu en dan eens een foto letterlijk probeert na te maken. Daar leer je immers veel van. Hoe heeft bijvoorbeeld het licht gestaan? ofwel een foto leren lezen. Voor de amateur fotograaf kun je zo je eigen beelden die je weer gaat maken in de toekomst naar een hoger niveau tillen. Alleen is het dan wel wat doe je uiteindelijk met het gekopieerde beeld dat je gemaakt hebt. Ik denk dat zodra je het gaat publiceren in bladen of iets dergelijk dat je “fout” bezig bent. Natuurlijk mag je er best trots op zijn wat je voor elkaar gekregen hebt maar publiceer zo’n beeld niet. Probeer dan eerst je eigen twist er aan te geven publiceer dat.
Correct, probeer het altijd je eigen te maken.
In music its totally normal that, for example, a (young) guitar player copy his hero Note for Note.
See how many Hendrix Wannabees out there. Some Guys dress like Hendrix and do Shows for 10 000 people as a Hendrix Clone.
For me the Question is: What do you loose, business like and financial, if somebody copy your picture 1 to 1 ?
If the answer is “no money” which will be in 99,9 %, than let it go.
If not, than dont blog etc on the net.
Be happy that the Guy dont do much better versions of your pictures 🙂
Normally you are always one step in front of the copycat, and that is what your customers pay.
The Quality to do some innovation shots with the customers product.
You are the innovator. And the innovator get the fame, not the copycat.
If you show everybody your work you must life with a copycat.
For many pro photographer on a good level its easy to copy nearly every light setup etc. just by looking at the picture.
Its just how much money he want to invest for finding the exact same clothing, location, buying the model etc.
They dont do it because that brings no money.
But why are the big guys on the market so sucessfull. They got the idears together with the skill to put
the customer wish into a good picture.
A copycat is just an amateur. Who cares about him?
Some people do.
My main issue is that to get better you should copy, however I would probably not post these images online, because I see them as study material.
With styles you do see it a lot, how many people are not trying to emulate the Dave Hill look ? I love the more cartoon look by the way, but always try to use it in my own work and feel/style, so not to copy someone just “borrowing” some techniques and incorporate it into my own.
Frank, i understand your position. BUT, what made Dave Hill so famous?……
That everybody try to copy him!!
That is the biggest compliment for somebody,in my opinion.
And im pretty sure that Dave Hill took money out of this, because everybody know his name.
He could get good money for a workshop etc.
Having copycats is the best marketing!!!
Oh trust me I don’t really have a position in this. I don’t mind if someone copies my work, I did not like being falsely accused that’s true but I’ve never even did the same thing.
I strongly believe as mentioned in other replies that we all copy and imitate. It’s almost impossible to not do.
I don’t think Dave became famous just for the look, the look has been there a long time but he made it his own and combined it with great striking setup images and that hit the right key with people. The “look” was done way before Dave hill.
copy? inspiration? so many ways to approach this. If one is at Niagra Falls and takes a picture of the falls framed like thousand of others, but on this day something unique occurs in the frame, is that a copy or was the photographer inspired but the unique element? I realize that is a vague example and not specific to what Frank is saying. I think every photographer who aspires to be a photographer can emulate a style but personalize that to be their own. If a photographer is a copy cat, then is that person really a photographer or just a picture taker? I realize that, like the music world mentioned in another comment, there are so many great photographers with certain styles, that it is difficult for any of us to find out own style without showing some form of copy from another. Maybe it would be best, if you want to copy, then do it privately, learn from it and take from that copy something that will inspire you in a future photograph. We all have o find ways to progress, to challenge ourselves to find what we are really capable of. That is really the hardest part for me, that challenge. Maybe if I did try and copy a photo, that would challenge me to try something totally foreign and in doing so, find a talent that I would never have discovered.
You’re absolutely right in your assertion that it’s next to impossible to create something truly original. Further, I think it’s natural to want to emulate those whom we admire– in fact, it’s a great learning exercise to take a great image, reverse engineer the lighting, and then reconstruct it from scratch. The key is, you don’t want to include it in your portfolio. You need to put a different twist on it and make it your own, or you’ll be labeled a copycatter.
Regarding your original question, I think it’s impossible to come up with a set of concrete rules that define where the border truly lies. As in your example, it’s quite common for photographers to unknowingly “copy” another’s work. Conversely, some photographers get away with intentionally ripping off other people’s ideas, and never even raise eyebrows. So it really all comes down to what a photographer’s true intentions are, coupled with the audience’s ability (or desire) to call the photographer’s intentions into question.
I think we all owe a tremendous amount of credit to those who came before, as well as our contemporaries, when it comes to artistic inspiration. And I also think we’ve all been guilty of blatant copying at one time or another. But to me, the true measure of an artist’s originality can only be ascertained in one place…..the court of public opinion.
Anyway, great article– really got me to put the thinking cap on this morning! 🙂
That’s why I posted it 😀
It’s indeed almost impossible to do something real unique.
When I did night club photography (Years ago) the trend moved from normal shots to special effect (drag shutter with flash 2 sec and flash to freeze the people) by using flash to capture the people and camera movement to capture the ambient lights. All club photogs started doing it all at different clubs. I forget where I got the idea. I don’t think anyone complained that we were copying someone else.
Photos I see on Frank’s site inspire me, I don’t think I have ever really tried to copy any, just use it for ideas.
Didn’t David LaChapelle win a lawsuit against Rhianna on these very grounds–concept and setup were supposedly copies of David’s work? Although, to be honest, the copies weren’t really *that* similar.
If a copy is made as a tribute and labelled as such, that’s a wonderful and flattering thing. If almost exact copies are made and used to subvert another photographer, that’s just unethical and mean-spirited. Probably not illegal, although the LaChapelle settlement makes one wonder at the limits of copyrighting ideas… Copying can also be used as a learning tool, to help one become proficient with the tools and techniques used to create a certain look.
Another aspect is, we all take workshops and read books, often from the same people. In applying what we’ve learned by rote, we are likely to create similar images.
To be inspired by a particular image doesn’t mean the photographer wants to copy that image. Inspiration is something that drives a photographer to create new, personalized works. A picture of a beautiful blond in dress standing on top of an air grate in a sidewalk, with the skirt billowing, is a copy, or a tribute. Not inspiration.
I do not want to be a photographer who sees somebody else’s work and copies that and sells it as my own. I want to create my own look and style, to imprint myself on the image. There are only so many physical positions you can place the human body in (more, if the subject is a contortionist!), but what do *I* bring to the image? How well do I communicate my *own* feelings and message? Those who create copies of others’ works as their own cannot have a message, and should be encouraged to find their own voice.
Well said!
Correct although I do think it was a adding of several scenes ? Making it more of a plus plus plus case.
For the rest I agree.
Finding your own voice is the best thing. And sometimes we have to copy and assimilate 😉
Personally I think it’s one of the greatest forms of admiration. But having said that, it’s one thing to try and replicate another persons work just to do it, and a whole different issue to replicate it, post it, and claim it to be ‘yours’ or ‘original’.
With some intermediate level shooters thinking…..
‘ If I can make an image just like Scott Kelby-Frank Doorhof-Joe McNally just by seeing this image, I can gather a better understand of how these people see light/shadows, and within that, develop my own style using that replication technique ‘. But to post that work and claim it as original or argue intellectual origination is a bit lame.
One of Frank’s DVD lessons that has always been a favorite of mine was the skateboard freezing in motion disk. Although I have shot guys at the skateboard park, and some of the images could have been interpreted as that with a strong Doorhof look or influence, I would never post those up claiming any originality.
Since I’ve been old enough to understand apertures and on into university for my photo arts degree, this topic and discussion has been taking place over ideas and the inspiration behind them. And just when you think you have found in your mind’s eye that one thing that has never been seen, or it just came from within and it’s all yours….
Wrong.
It’s probably been hanging on some persons wall for the last 10 years.
As a guy who has shot a ton of product – office type images and just started to find myself artistically, people like Frank are my artistic compass. I use his work (and others) to see what they saw in an image, maybe WHY they saw it that way, and in many instances those images have spun off something similar, or in other cases.. Completely different.