As a photographer, you are left little choice but to put your work online so that potential clients might stumble across it but this does mean that you are exposing yourself to countless instances of copyright infringement. As soon as an image gains traction on websites like Pinterest, there is really no telling where they could end up. I have found my work being used to advertise other photographers, products from household-name beauty brands. I’ve found it in the pages of Conde Nast magazines, book covers, and even had portraits of mine being sold in the Second Life community for gamers to “wear” as “skins” on their virtual avatars. There are ways of fighting this IP theft. I’ve had success with websites like Pixsy.com - a service that automatically scrapes the web for uses of your work and allows you to sync your instagram - but it is only effective in certain countries and the internet can truly be the Wild West. Fighting all the instances of copyright infringement I encounter would be a full time job, so you really have to take a deep breath and pick your battles.
Copyright laws are complicated and vary from country to country but it’s generally understood that taking someone’s photograph and using it without permission is wrong. Derivative art, however, seems to be even more of a murky subject. As an art school graduate and illustrator myself, I feel a bit as though the concept of “using a photograph as reference” has been skewed. To me, a reference is something that serves as a visual aid for pose, expression, texture, emotion, lighting etc, but is not to be copied exactly. For example, I might flip through Vogue and find a photograph of a model in a pose that inspires me and use that to map out a composition. I might be inspired by how Alphonse Mucha draws hair and find an old travel photo from Italy that I want to reference for the background. Sure, I’ve incorporated elements from different existing works but the end result is unrecognizable as I’m putting my own spin on it. With the rise of photorealism and digital art, however, the line between reference and copy is becoming increasingly blurred. I’m honestly flattered when people use my photos as proper references - I love that my art inspires more art, but when I see images that have been copied, pixel by pixel - or worse, simply have a filter added - it hurts. Especially when that “original” piece is signed and up for sale without my permission or the permission of my subject.
Overall, I know it’s a tricky subject from a legal standpoint to bring up, but in terms of etiquette, from an image creator’s perspective, it is always best to ask permission when you want to closely replicate work and ask yourself how you would feel if someone did the same to you without asking.
I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments! Where do you draw the line? Pun intended.