My impression of the OP was that it was intended as a warning, not as shaming. Experienced, better-known artists would be at even greater risk of legal problems for infringement, and it seems most would know and avoid this. Falsely accusing someone is also problematic…
1 Like
Legally, yes, it changes it. But no one’s buying those because they’re in love with the way she paints the back of some woman’s head. They buy them for the recreated classic work. You know that, I know that, we all know that.
Now that’s fine, and I don’t personally give a care. But if the Linda’s of the DPW community are gonna get on their high horse about the other painter, they have to have some freakin’ consistency.
I just googled ‘The Afghan Girl Painting’.
There are a million copies of that thing. Maybe there’s no copyright on that photo?
It could also be that the photographer is simply choosing not to pursue these copyright violations.
1 Like
David said, “Every week or so Jurick has another copy up, and no one says a word. But the Afghan Girl copy artist gets publicly shamed?”
Linda Carney’s comment is valid. I read it as a reminder to artists that you cannot directly copy, verbatim, an image that is copyright protected without permission from the photographer. And it does happen often. Any time I see an image I would like to paint, I try to hunt down the photographer and ask permission - either to use a part of or the entire image to create a painting. If I don’t hear back, I don’t do it. Period. I respect their property. It’s not often, but I have asked and gotten permission from photographers, and I keep the email exchanges in case it’s needed in the future. That’s how any artist should handle using photographs that are copyright protected, or for that matter, any photographs.
Now if you are composing a painting and need, let’s say, a bluebird, and you find a photograph of a bluebird online, the bluebird as an object is not protected. You are using it as a reference.
As for me, “Jurick” or “big dog” as you referenced me - I don’t copy photographs that are not my own photographs. If you’re referring to the variety of artworks I feature in my paintings of museum patrons viewing those works, you are mistaken that I am violating copyright laws. It is the same as the bluebird I mentioned above. Now, if I painted “Starry Night” by van Gogh, verbatim, as we all know the painting to be, and sold it, that’s different. I would be COPYING another artist’s PAINTING. I don’t do that. Thousands of examples of piracy happen all day, every day. It is a fraud. I don’t do that.
It all comes down to knowing what you are talking about. And for all artists to be smart and respectful.
2 Likes
Actually I don’t think that’s entirely the case. There is one of Karin’s pieces in particular I adore. It’s this one:
Woman in Gold
Yes it is a copy of Klimt’s painting but I think Karin has been incredibly clever and skilful with the person she chose to stand in front of the painting and the way the person is dressed, which perfectly compliments the painting in front of her: the fabric of the skirt, the spots on the cardigan, the Klimt brochure in her hand, the red hair. I love it. I don’t think Karin just plonks any old body in front of the paintings. To me, they almost always compliment the painting in a sense.
3 Likes
Karin!
You posted as I was typing. I hope I got my assessment correct. 
2 Likes
Exactly. You don’t know. It would be helpful and professional of an artist to include credit to the original.
I’m talking about a consistent theme in the forum over the past couple of years, of someone starting a thread like this, others piling on some poor sap, and the rest of 'em feeling smug and self-satisfied.
I don’t know how often you check in here, but if it’s regularly, you’ll know what I mean.
Again, where are all these threads?
1 Like
Gee, I haven’t bookmarked all that over the years in preparation for this great and glorious day, but maybe I should have? Look, you’re the research addict, so go for it. Art Talk is all yours to sift through.
You haven’t shown any underlying social dynamic, you’ve only falsely accused two artists of copyright infringement and insulted one’s work. Seems to me they’re due an apology.
1 Like
I’m due the apology, I think. And whoever did the Afghan Girl copy.
Because I didn’t bring up infringement, you and Linda did.
Failure to be truly original is not the same as copyright infringement. But I appreciate the gimmick. And if it works, I say they should keep it up. We all do what we gotta to pay the bills.
Actually you should retract your statements indicating that Karen’s paintings are copyright infringement, because publishing a false accusation of a crime that harms someone’s reputation is libel.
1 Like
Who committed a crime? Jesus, what did I miss? Who’s a criminal?
My claim was their lack or originality. Boring art. They’re definitely guilty of that.
I think Linda made the crime accusations. And Hilda wanted to call the Copyright police.
David, with all due respect, you have no idea what you’re talking about regarding why someone buys my painting. And if you’re put out by a misguided beef that there are “big dogs” on DPW who don’t get criticism, I have dozens of emails to prove you’re wrong. I’m no more important or talented than any artist. Maybe you should build your own website and invite artists to join and post their works.
Well, we agree to disagree.
Let me put it this way. There have been multiple threads in which people pile on artists who sell cheap, or start bidding low. But Carol marine used to start at a buck, and David Marine wrote of another who did the same thing. Wrote about it in the Help section.
But no one ever went after her for the pricing strategy she used to use. Because it’s her site, and they like her (I like her, too), and they want to be like her.
Leaves a bad taste in my mouth, that’s all.
And then Connie, who knows damn well what I’m talking about, fights with me just for the sake of fighting with me. What that’s about, I have no idea.
Yes, and thank you Jacqueline.
I wasn’t trying to shame anyone. I was just trying to make people aware of possible consequences.
I think that ship already sailed, my friend.