| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/24/2007 02:45:30 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by skiprow:
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. |
Isn't it odd that you can't use a face to sell toothpaste, but you can use it to sell magazines, and in Tom Cruise's case, even though you malign him, call him crazy and question his gender preference, you can, after all that, harrass him, take a picture of him and his children and put it on your "magazine" to sell copies.
I love the 1st amendment as much as the next guy sworn to uphold it, but that just seems parasitic and wrong. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:46:33 PM · #27 |
Thanks for pointing to that! I love this part of the interview, which has to do with copyright issue:
JC: You will not be surprised that I bring up the diCorcia lawsuit. The case was dismissed, but - I think - questions do remain. But part of me thinks - and I've heard this from other people - that somehow, there might be something wrong with taking photos of other people without their consent and then hanging those photos in galleries. What do you think about this?
BS: I have never thought for one second of a moment that it is wrong. I always thought that it was right.... a little weird though maybe. The first of these three series I started was actually meant to do just what you are talking about. I thought it would be interesting if someone went to Times Square in order to have their portrait made and then a picture that that they sat for that night could then hang in a gallery or even better a museum.
But there are really lots of roads that you can take questions from that case down. It actually reminds me of that great quote by Lorca diCorcia himself: "Photography is a foreign language that everybody thinks they know how to speak." People's take on photography is just so different and probably real personal, but somehow each person just assumes that their take is objective, because deep down they just really believe that a photo is objective.
But I just don't exactly believe that a two-dimensional image on paper is really that person, or even definitive at all - it is one angle that allows you to consider the subject. But it is my picture not an actual person stuck on the wall. It reminds me of another great quote, by Gary Winogrand. When he was out taking pictures people would often say - "hey, why are you taking my picture" he would say back to them "I am not taking your picture, I am taking my picture." |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 02:56:16 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by jemison:
When he was out taking pictures people would often say - "hey, why are you taking my picture" he would say back to them "I am not taking your picture, I am taking my picture." |
I love that! :)
edit: He has another series as well, in case you missed it: //www.3situations.com/BillSullivanWorks/TPmaster%20.html
Message edited by author 2007-01-24 14:57:16. |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 05:11:08 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:
Originally posted by jemison:
When he was out taking pictures people would often say - "hey, why are you taking my picture" he would say back to them "I am not taking your picture, I am taking my picture." |
I love that! :)
edit: He has another series as well, in case you missed it: //www.3situations.com/BillSullivanWorks/TPmaster%20.html |
That is a strange series...the actual photos don't match up with the thumbnail page...I really wanted to see what are shown as images 36-48. They are a series of two shots of the same subject. Oh well... |
|
|
|
01/24/2007 06:01:25 PM · #30 |
There is an information link on each of his series. From the turnstile series:
Situation 2 : The Subway Turnstile Pictures
(More Turns) I developed a situation so that various subjects could be defined by the constraints of exactly the same mechanical apparatus. The scenario consisted of someone passing through a subway turnstile. At the moment that the subjects passed through the turnstile, unknown to them, I took their picture stationed at a distance of eleven feet. I stood there turning pages of a magazine observing subjects out of the corner of my eye, waiting for only the moment when they pushed the turnstile bar to release the shutter.
There are roughly 87 images that make up the series Time Port . They are printed in editions of 2 sizes and are usually shown in groups of 3 or more.
|
|
|
|
01/26/2007 02:59:14 AM · #31 |
| Everyone looks so tired in those photos! |
|
|
|
01/27/2007 05:56:27 AM · #32 |
| I also noticed the sad lack of smiles! Think I'm going to make a point of slapping a great big toothy grin on my face at all times just in case I ever get caught like this! Might get some very strange looks though. |
|
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 02:07:57 PM EDT.
