This Takes The Prize For Cheek !

I would watch him too. By the way, and I am asking out of curiosity and for my own future reference, what is the going rate for image usage?

There's no harm in asking and certainly nothing wrong with saying "No Thanks" to a licensing fee. If nothing else, it sounds like he may see more traffic to his various sites from artists looking for infringements. But to Google, that just reads as "more traffic." Is this part of a well-oiled marketing strategy? Could be.


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

Ask him if you can photograph one of his paintings and then be allowed to sell the prints for it. See what he says to that.

Roseann ! I've missed you. That was good one.

there are many like that.

one guy wanted an image of mine, i didn't and couldn't sell it commercial like that. he told me that he could just download it.or he could have a friend download it and he would pay the guy that downloaded it and some how that would be legal. i've been keeping an eye on his page.

some people think that one artist should help another, but its not like your getting credit or really anything else from him. and while i suppose you might not have ever known, some one else might have spotted it. i have people spotting my work all the time. makes you wonder why he did ask.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Great story...sounds like a jerk for sure.

I don't understand the snarkiness. Many artists allow painters to use their photos as reference, mostly at no charge. The artist in question clearly didn't expect to pay a license fee and declined the offer. My guess is that he has *never* paid a license fee and it came as a surprise. How all of a sudden is he a jerk??


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

I think $2.99 per pound for apples is unreasonable. I bet you do too. Perhaps that makes us jerks. Perhaps we refuse to buy apples at $2.99 per pound. Jerks again or freedom of choice?


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

Dan I think it was his attitude after having been given a price.
David I think I would have told him he could use for a percentage of sales from the painting, and future print sales.

TL Mair
http://tlmair.com

Dan, you make great points as well.

I think a lot of artists simply do not want to give away their hard work for free any longer.

He's a jerk for saying he could have gone ahead and stolen it, altered it a bit and David would have been none the wiser. Also, stating he was being professional just for asking. No, not professional...he was trying to get something for nothing, and then spouted off like a 10 year old when he was turned down. A jerk...a cheeky jerk.

Given the limited information offered here, I would be more hesitant to point fingers.
But hey, it's just some unnamed internet thief who will be none the wiser, right?

Joy, most painters who paint realistically (and many who don't) use reference photos. I don't know any who pay license fees for the privilege. I have read that some photographers here have had some success with fees for painters, but that isn't the norm.

It's disturbing that you are so quick to publicly condemn a fellow artist based on nothing more than an impression. If you are this incensed over suggestion and innuendo, what are you like when things really go south? I suspect there is no Joy :-)


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

There are a few painters I know and follow, who may not specifically 'copy', but I get a kick out of seeing them being inspired by something I did. When it does happen it's usually an insignificant detail, buy whole compositions have been taken and transformed.

If it was a direct copy I'd probably be annoyed, touch wood, especially if they mass produced and took credit for my work

Well, I'm a painter and I'd never expect to use a professional photographer's photo for reference for free, I'm amazed a professional painter would.

Dan, if this sentence is accurate he does deserve to be condemned;

"He suggested that he could have just taken my picture without my knowledge, altered it slightly, and I would be none the wiser, and he was being polite and "professional" by asking my permission to use it!"

Joy, I'm with you on this one, he was a jerk.

TL, good point, I'll bear that in mind next time.

Dan, he is not suddenly a jerk because he was surprised at being asked to pay for a licence, he was a jerk because of his attitude afterwards.

I hasten to add that this guy is not part of the FAA community, I have searched and he is not on here.

My favorite is "It will add to your presence."

For goodness sake... as an artist I only use my own photographs as reference. That's safest.

I've had people post my paintings as their header on FB, they thought it should honor me... the problem was, they cut out my signature... sigh.

Any artist that has to cheat to sell, is no artist at all... they are just cheaters!!!

I am betting he wouldn't take kindly to someone taking one of his paintings...copying it...altering it slightly and selling it.

David good for you for asking to get paid for your work. You deserve it!

Dan, I'm not "incensed". I'm not angry. I was offering my opinion (which, btw, David agrees with). I told myself a year ago that I would never spar with you because I believe most if not all of your responses on this forum are made only to upset or incite people....or only to state yet again your views about how all art should be free for anyone to use no matter if it's copyrighted or not. I usually gloss over your responses basically ignoring them but you directed your answer to me by using my name. You don't know the first thing about me so why don't you keep your thoughts to yourself about people's lives and whether or not there is any Joy in them when things go south, hmmm? (how long have you been waiting to use that one?) And then the smiley face....was that for the moderator so you don't get thrown off here? I'd prefer it if you didn't have any thoughts at all about how I handle my life, but I have no control over that.

Don't direct responses to me on someone else's thread by using my name when I haven't directed mine to you. Now back to putting you on the Ignore Plan.

(David, I'm sorry...I don't mean to hijack your thread but I cannot use personal messaging in this case. Please forgive me.)

The famous artist who took images by photographers on a well known social sight simply changed the color of the eyes. I believe he combined the images into one. He was taken to court (US) and won the lawsuit against the photographers. It depends on how much he changes the train from your image he is putting into another scene. It's very possible with few changes to the train it will be a legal image.

people ask so they aren't sued. but they also expect to get it for free for some reason. so people should be annoyed by it.


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Joy, no problem, I don't think you hijacked my thread.

I think under the circumstances you are entitled to be annoyed, and I think you voiced it very well.

The other side of this is the originator of the image could loose and owe a lot due to of his and their lawyer fees. It would be too costly for most to find out unless they were famous I suspect unless their lawyer guarantees not paying fees if the case was lost. The best one can do is to send a bill if you think they are selling your image and not complying with the law.

There are numerous legal firms that work for artists now that seek out and enforce copyright against infringement at no upfront cost to the artist. (At least in the US.)

It was the "I could have just taken it" comment that incenses people here not the fact that he asked or chose not to pay. That happens all day long to artists on here.

As others have said, I likely would comeback and say, true, you have no issues if I take one of your paintings and digitally alter it and sell it as my own, right?

For the record, I allow most painters to use my work for reference at no charge with the caveats that they do not sell prints and do not sell the original online. Now, if they didn't ask and then I found out after the fact it would be directed to my attorneys.

"I was recently contacted by a professional artist who has a large studio in the south of England, and I know he sells regularly on various sites."

Professional artist.
Large studio.
Sells regularly.

FAA threads, on a daily basis, are filled with artists asking how to be successful. Perhaps one key is deciding what's worth spending money on and what isn't. Knowing when to ask and knowing when to say No are important skills.

"He suggested that he could have just taken my picture without my knowledge"

Suggested, but not said. There is a valuable lesson here if one doesn't let their imagination obscure what actually happened (and didn't).


Dan Turner
Dan Turner's Seven Keys to Selling Art Online

Joy, I concur with you 100%. I really wish we did have an ignore button here but I find the scroll moves pretty darn fast in the meantime.

Dan,

"He suggested that he could have just taken my picture without my knowledge"

Suggested, but not said. There is a valuable lesson here if one doesn't let their imagination obscure what actually happened (and didn't).

Suggested / Implied / Said - In this case don't you think they all pretty much add up to the same thing ? So if I SUGGESTED to the police that I robbed a bank last week they won't do anything because I didn't actually SAY I robbed a bank ?

I can see why some people think you come on here just to annoy and incite others and I fully agree.

wait, so if an artist contacted him, and he didn't sell well, it would be a different story?

how does it matter if an artist sells well, why would it be an honor to give away my image - and if he does sell well, couldn't he afford it?

you don't become successful giving away your art. its very doubtful that guy would be a stepping stone


the fact that this so called great artist even implied he takes other works, probably mean he already has.

a few facts:

1. if you have art that is worthy of using, you have art that is worthy of buying.
2. if you own a big place and sell often - you can afford to buy the item you need to complete the painting.
3. it shouldn't matter how great the other artist is, the items price is the items price.

the funny thing is - people ask how to be successful, and this is how you do it, you charge for your work. your hardly going to be a success by giving it all away for free.

---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

I'm starting to like you Mike!

wait, starting?

what was i like up til now?


---Mike Savad
http://www.MikeSavad.com

Straight to the point Mike, excellent !

Just kiddin'! I always wait for you to answer or talk on my discussions. You don't pull any punches. I appreciate that.

Dan - if the artist paints the image exactly the same as the picture, that's creating competition, direct competition for David. Despite the fact that you may feel that it should be free for everyone, not all of us share your opinion on our art. The internet is not the public domain so by uploading our work to the internet does not mean we are giving everyone permission to download our art and use it however they like. The artist has an elitist attitude that sounds like he should be allowed to take anything he likes and use it because of who he is. Not everyone shares that opinion.

I do know a lot of painters and drawers who look at images on line for reference, but they are not looking to copy those images exactly. They are looking for points of reference, such as a pose or an expression. They are not looking to steal someone else's work.

Phyllis B, in response to your question about what the going rate is, there is no definitive answer to that.

It depends on various factors;

1. Who wants the image ?
2. What are they using it for ?
3. Is it the type of image which could easily be obtained elsewhere, or is it something more specialised ?
4. What value do you put on your own work, how much time, effort and expense have you put into that piece of work ?

I have donated work for free to some organisations and will continue to do so under certain circumstances, for example to a couple of local charity organisations. I happen to live near a couple of steam railway heritage sites and I am always taking pictures there, so I donate mounted prints occasionally for them to sell in their shops as my way of giving something back.

Hope this helps.

I'm getting depressed by just reading the discussion board lately.

All, thanks for your input and comments.

Discussion now closed.