| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2007 04:31:03 PM · #1 |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 04:33:16 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 04:49:09 PM · #3 |
Those are very cool! Would one need to get releases from these people afterwards? From the description of his project it sounds as if they were totally candid and that he hid the camera while taking them. They are clearly on exhibit someplace so I'm curious if releases are required for art such as this? I'm guessing not, unless he was going to take the next elevator down to find all the people that were on it to get them to sign releases. :)
Very cool idea indeed.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 04:58:26 PM · #4 |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:03:08 PM · #5 |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:24:52 PM · #6 |
I wonder normally for a release need less then five people, and technically he had 6 on display.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:27:51 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by C-Fox:
I wonder normally for a release need less then five people, and technically he had 6 on display. |
It's in a place open to the public so a release should not be needed.
Just my 2 cents though, if you want a more accurate answer ask a lawyer (who will subsequently change you more than 2 cents ;) ) |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:28:44 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by jenesis:
Those are very cool! Would one need to get releases from these people afterwards? From the description of his project it sounds as if they were totally candid and that he hid the camera while taking them. They are clearly on exhibit someplace so I'm curious if releases are required for art such as this? I'm guessing not, unless he was going to take the next elevator down to find all the people that were on it to get them to sign releases. :)
Very cool idea indeed. |
(IANAL) Technically, at least in Oregon, no. In OR, you only need permission to record someone's voice. Photos don't require permission. |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 05:50:14 PM · #9 |
No release necessary as long as the image is not used for commercial purposes (i.e. stuck on a shampoo ad or something)
|
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:00:41 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
No release necessary as long as the image is not used for commercial purposes (i.e. stuck on a shampoo ad or something) |
that pretty much sums it up.
you do not need a release for anything used editorially
you do not need a release for non-mass produced art
you do not need a release for anything in your portfolio
you do not need a release for anything used personally
you DO need a release for anything used commercially
there are exceptions, but those need to be brought up with an IP lawyer.
for more insights and useful links, see this thread ;-) |
|
|
|
01/23/2007 06:23:26 PM · #11 |
| I assume paparazzi use things commercially without a release all the time, no? |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 09:12:15 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
I assume paparazzi use things commercially without a release all the time, no? |
no, they sell their images to publications; that is considered editorial use, not commercial use. it would be considered commercial use if they tried to sell an image of tom cruise to a toothpaste manufacturer for an advertisement; that would require a model release. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:13:47 AM · #13 |
What do you suppose he is using?
The prints looks huge. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:17:20 AM · #14 |
| None look too happy. Pretty cool stuff. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:23:04 AM · #15 |
Originally posted by rswank:
What do you suppose he is using?
The prints looks huge. |
"light jet prints mounted to aluminum "
from the site.
The thing I like about these photos, is that all people have a place to go, something in their hands to show us a tiny bit about who they are. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:47:42 AM · #16 |
I think that is Bear_Music on the 2nd row, last image "Turn 10045 April 2004"-image #36!!!!
|
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:50:29 AM · #17 |
Did anyone spot a single person smiling?
I didn't.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2007 11:53:07 AM · #18 |
thats really great.... wow so cool
|
|
|
|
01/24/2007 01:30:59 PM · #19 |
I like his other set of sequences, outside elevators, that were printed/ mounted vertically. Pretty interesting take.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2007 01:36:34 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by biteme:
Originally posted by rswank:
What do you suppose he is using?
The prints looks huge. |
"light jet prints mounted to aluminum "
from the site.
|
I meant what camera setup.
For such large prints I would think you'd see pretty apparent detail loss with 35mm digital compared to say an 8x10 view cam. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 01:41:38 PM · #21 |
| OH I enjoyed looking at the images of real people/life. Is it me or are the males more likely to have their mouths hanging open? Had a chuckle or two over some of the bug eyed ones. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:03:43 PM · #22 |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:03:55 PM · #23 |
One of the people captured looks like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers, but in disguise!
Hint: he's in the 3rd row. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:22:39 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by rswank:
Originally posted by biteme:
Originally posted by rswank:
What do you suppose he is using?
The prints looks huge. |
"light jet prints mounted to aluminum "
from the site.
|
I meant what camera setup.
For such large prints I would think you'd see pretty apparent detail loss with 35mm digital compared to say an 8x10 view cam. |
medium format, probably digital. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:37:41 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by heatherd:
Had a chuckle or two over some of the bug eyed ones. |
#29 - Turn 9168 April 2004 - O...M...G !
GREAT stuff! They're like ants. :) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/08/2025 02:11:15 PM EDT.
