| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/06/2016 06:06:54 PM · #1 |
I've noticed a couple of images lately that were taken off a TV screen... Is this legal now?
I once shot an image of a screen in Times Square and was DQd for the art rule.
Thanks. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:03:28 PM · #2 |
This one, I let the motion blur the shot, but I was also moving the camera but I would choose to not enter this shot in a challenge.
I think it's OK nowadays as long as the comp is its own work of art. If I took a photo of the Tour de France from the TV screen & presented it as my own original shot from the actual real TDF, then I think that would not be OK. But the rule on this subject is still open to interpretation, I think.
Message edited by author 2016-08-06 19:22:25. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:08:54 PM · #3 |
| Maybe we could have a challenge in which we feature or incorporate TV in a creative way. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:18:12 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by jomari:
Maybe we could have a challenge in which we feature or incorporate TV in a creative way. |
Oh I have wanted to suggest this, but I didn't know how to word it. I've been taking pictures of the TV screen for a long time, especially when the video is a technical failure in some way. The way the TV screen refreshes now makes it possible to get an interesting result without that bar, which is good. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:18:31 PM · #5 |
Here's the current, blanket rule that is posted in "Common Rules" (that is, it is part of all rulesets):
Originally posted by Common Rules:
You May: include existing artwork in your entry, but photo-realistic artwork such as printed photos, monitor images or realistic illustrations must either be clearly presented as artwork or used only as a minor supporting element. Using photo-realistic artwork to simulate physical objects or backgrounds that provide the primary impact of an entry will be grounds for disqualification. |
Note the underlined portions. In Pixelpig's image, there's nothing photorealistic about the original he worked from, and even if there HAD been by the time he'd flipped-n-blended it he'd gotten to a wholly original place. In the case of my image, the rendering was not photorealistic and even if it HAD been the inclusion of the Peacock logo in the upper right would have satisfied the rule, if not the voters.
The artwork rule basically exists to keep people from passing off out-of-date photos as current, others' work as their own, or to create backgrounds which the viewer might think actually were real scenes. We don't, as a rule, care about whether people actually photographj art, as long as we know that's what they've done. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:31:11 PM · #6 |
I do remember this causing a bit of stir under the old rules. ;-)
 |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 07:39:40 PM · #7 |
| Wow. Read the comments. I think you should've kept on with this technique. FWIW, I sometimes think that those who think of photography as documentary in nature are not best please when an artist monkeys with reality before documenting it. |
|
|
|
08/06/2016 09:23:02 PM · #8 |
| I've had three DQs under the old artwork rule, which should give people an idea of how confusing it was. The new rule is quite a bit better ... |
|
|
|
08/22/2016 09:20:36 AM · #9 |
Originally posted by jomari:
Maybe we could have a challenge in which we feature or incorporate TV in a creative way. |
I like that idea. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/16/2024 09:44:19 AM EDT.
