Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Copyright Issues
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
Good ol' copyrights.....
As Carol says if it is royalty/copyright free then no issues etc. If there is an issue of copyright then you need to contact the owner of the copyright, if there is a person in the phot there can be a DPA issue, if you can see their face and you need their permission - if you can't then then there's no issue. But you must obtain permission of the owner and mention them as the original owner of the image if you are to sell if on (they could even demand a percentage of the sale - happened to me). Most times the owner of the original image will be cool.
When you you then paint the image, you create a second copyright of the image - your copyright. I know this as I have dealt with MoD images and been advised.
If you want to do a 'famous' person you then need their permission and their agents permission as it a brand and copyright, but if you took the picture it is your copyright then. Confusing isn't it.
Basically cover your back, just incase.
Posted
This topic has been covered many times and it may pay to look back on previous posts on the subject (if you can find them) where I have commented at some length on the subject.
So in brief: if you use someone else's photo you need permission to do so if it is not royalty free or if you have not sought permission. For the copyright holder the difficulty is always proving that their photo was the one used. For example there are thousands of photos in existence of say Tower Bridge - how can anyone ever prove which one was used beyond reasonable doubt? Before using a photo always ask if it contains anything unique to that particular image which is readily identifiable (people in certain poses, a passing lorry with unusual livery etc) or if it's the only photo available of the subject - if either apply don't use it. Just common sense really.
Regarding so-called celebrities etc, providing you took the original photo which you use as source material then you are free from copyright issues - there is no copyright in a personal image in English law - just consider some of the photos which appear in the press of celebrities and even Royalty which are far from flattering and for which you can be sure no permission was ever sought or granted. If you didn't take the source photo then my comments above apply.
I often refer to the many paintings of deceased celebrities (Elvis Marilyn etc) by young artists who weren't even alive when the celebrity died (just look at the fine art catalogues). They must have used photos which would almost certainly be subject to copyright and yet it would be nigh impossible to prove which photo was used and hence they get away with it and the galleries close a blind eye.
Posted
There are several sites offering copyright free photographs, donated for use by artists - indeed, we used to have some on POL: are they still here, anyone?
Be very careful with anything branded: someone was pursued for painting a guitar with a logo, either of a group or more probably the manufacturer's; and I often wonder how people manage to sell paintings of racing cars with a quite faithful copy of the Ferrari or Maclaren decals; or rather, how they get away with not being sued. It's when you try to sell them that trouble can ensue - say, if you were to copy Youssuf Karsh's distinctive photograph of Winston Churchill, complete with trademark scowl (achieved by Karsh whipping his cigar away from him just before he took the shot, I understand: very artful, and rather brave) - if Karsh's work is still in copyright, his estate could sue. But as Michael says, there's a lot more on this subject tucked away in various posts on the forum, and links to professional sites which give the full run-down.
http://www.isleofwightlandscapes.net
http://www.wightpaint.blogspot.co.uk
Posted
Thank you all for your time and your valued advice.
Sylvia, I alway respect and appreciate your comments as I am very new to painting. Take my latest painting for instance, how does one get to paint such magnificent machines if not from old photographs, no amount of modern equipment can photograph what is no longer around to photograph.
Please don't think me argumentative, I do not mean to be, but I am confused. I may have infringed on copyright without knowing it.
Thanks,
Steve
Posted
http://www.painters-online.co.uk/articles-tips-advice/reference-material.htm
Well done, Syd - and here's the link. There's a mass of stuff there.
Grampy, I don't think your picture is likely to be a copyright breach - anything more than 50 years old is normally problem-free.
http://www.isleofwightlandscapes.net
http://www.wightpaint.blogspot.co.uk