4 Reasons To Collect Your Own Reference Photographs
I had recently run up to the MN Horse Expo and as is my way took a few hundred photos for painting reference. This got me to thinking a bit about why it is so important to collect my own reference photos in light of the fact that there are plenty of sights allowing you to use their images (though usually for a price.)
So in case your asking yourself why should you go to all this trouble, well here’s 4 good reasons why.
I. Connects you with your work
2. Avoids Legal Troubles
3. Professionalism
4.There’s nothing that beats that “being there” experience
Collecting your own reference photos will definitely aid in your ability to connect with your art. And if you connect with it chances are, collectors will also.
But if you’re still not convinced collecting your own images is worth the hassle, well then you need to familiarize yourself with the terms for using the work of others for your reference materials.It is good to be able to understand the difference between royalty free and copyright free. According to Wikipedia
Royalty Free is:
Royalty-free is a term employed in negotiating the right to use creative content, such as photographs, video, or music. The term royalty-free means that once the content is licensed under a set of guidelines, the licensee is normally free to use it in perpetuity without paying additional royalty charges.
While Copyright is
Copyright is the set of exclusive rights granted to the author or creator of an original work, including the right to copy, distribute and adapt the work. These rights can be licensed, transferred and/or assigned.
So Copyright Free is:
Copyright-free is a conventional expression extensively used in Japan by authors whose works can be used freely regardless of copyright. It is distinguished from public domain.
And Finally Public Domain
Works are in the public domain if they are not covered by intellectual property rights at all, if the intellectual property rights have expired,[1] and/or if the intellectual property rights are forfeited or unclaimed.
The defining characteristic of copyright infringement is if the average viewer when looking at the two works see a similarity. The copying need not be exact.
Seriously, isn’t it just easier to go out and get your own?
For more information on collecting your own reference photographs and how to organize them please visit these lenses.
How To Build Your Own Reference Library
Organizing Your Photo Reference Library
Tags: photography, squidoo
Phew! That sounds complicated! I must admit, I tend to use reference photos from the internet (I haven’t had the opportunity to photograph Polar bears, for example
and them squirrels are damn quick!). I’m hoping that no one will ever be able to tell which photograph I’ve used! I see your point though. It must be easier to recognise the reference when you’re working in 2d, and some animals have very particular markings.
My niece asked me today if I had made a cat yet (which I haven’t) and there are still so many other pieces I want to make! Some of them are famous archaeological finds - how do I get my own photo’s of those??
I totally understand. I’ve been wanting to do a hippo for ages, but no pics of my own to work from. (sigh)
I would think creating a 3-d image from 2-d photographs falls into a different category in regards to copyright infringement. You are inherently changing the nature of the image. Would anyone looking at Polo and looking at the ref. pics you used be able to to see a similarity?
You should totally do a cat.
No, I don’t think they would see any similarity at all!! Hahaha!! But that’s just cos I’m not as good as I’d like to be!
Seriously though, I see what you mean. There is no background, and the animal would only look similar to the photo from one angle!
Yes, I definitely will do a cat at some point. Hell, I don’t think there’s an animal I haven’t thought about doing! Except maybe a hippo
That’s what I figured so then I think you are totally safe.
Not to scare, Undaunted, because I think a single figure done with several references would not violate copy right, but I did see where a scultptor had done some lab puppies from someone’s photo and was being sued for coppyright. I will try to find more about that and post something if I find it. It is in my memory banks.