Then having read his recommendations, I became quiet peeved, as he runs
roughshod over fair use in several cases.
On 11/1/2015 11:32 AM, P.J. Alling wrote:
I don't see how that's different than photographing a Copyrighted
poster. No real interesting questions here at all, the law is pretty
I don't see how that's different than photographing a Copyrighted
poster. No real interesting questions here at all, the law is pretty
much black letter.
On 10/31/2015 2:21 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Some interesting questions arise!
Some interesting questions arise!
http://improvephotography.com/35091/copyright-nightmare-taking-photos-of-people-with-tattoos/
--
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
I can't see the difference between photographing someone with tattoos and
someone wearing clothes that someone else has designed, or a street containing
buildings and billboards, and tons of other shit that's copyright. Sounds to me
like a lawyer trying to drum up some spurious business.
B
>
Mark: thanks, that's an interesting article.
Bob: I don't know how it works on your side of the pond, but in the US,
sculptures in a photo MAY BE and often ARE covered by copyright.
There have been several cases in the past decade or so.
See e.g. this case:
It won't be long before you'll have to pay a fee just to see a building
in the street. Google-glass style glasses will note your gaze and charge
accordingly. Rich bastards will have 180 degree f.o.v. lenses to take in
all the copyrighted architecture as you walk down the street. Careful
not to
Igor PDML-StR wrote:
>Mark: thanks, that's an interesting article.
>
>Bob: I don't know how it works on your side of the pond, but in the US,
>sculptures in a photo MAY BE and often ARE covered by copyright.
>There have been several cases in the past decade or so.
>See e.g. this case:
Actually, here is the latest bill that I can find that covers fashion
design protection:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3523/text
And here is its discussion in Forbes:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/01/03/protecting-fashion-designs/
This bill was meant as a
Googled, cool.
Marnie aka Doe :-)
In a message dated 1/27/2014 7:42:01 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
p...@paper-ape.com writes:
on 2014-01-26 23:10 eactiv...@aol.com wrote
Interesting. Never heard of that, at all.
see if your library has any books of Man Ray's work
--
PDML
Wasn't really about photography though. It was all about museums curators.
On 1/26/2014 1:59 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
I read it thoroughly. It was worth my while.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:38 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
I skimmed it, there may actually be a new thought
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
Lessee -- five million quatloos to the first person who identifies the
author.
--
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
Philip K. Dick, a science fiction writer.
On Jan 27, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Aahz Maruch a...@pobox.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
Lessee -- five million
Reality: It's a nice place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there.
On 1/27/2014 4:28 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.
Lessee -- five
Reality is living in one of the 48 states that dont have legalized
recreational marijuana.
On 1/27/2014 5:04 PM, John wrote:
Reality: It's a nice place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there.
On 1/27/2014 4:28 PM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
on 2014-01-26 23:10 eactiv...@aol.com wrote
Interesting. Never heard of that, at all.
see if your library has any books of Man Ray's work
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
An article in today’s Times that’s relevant to recent discussions:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/26/arts/design/with-cameras-optional-new-directions-in-photography.html?_r=0
“The iPhone, the scanner and Photoshop are yielding a daunting range of
imagery, and artists mining these new
Same goes for what is a movie?
--
J.C. O'Connell
hifis...@gate.net
--
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:26, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Same goes for what is a movie?
That one's easy. It's a sequence of photographs replayed at 14fps.
On the other hand, you could, like André Bazin, ask what is cinema? Or you
could go further, as the French cineastes do, and
Bob W wrote:
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:26, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Same goes for what is a movie?
That one's easy. It's a sequence of photographs replayed at 14fps.
On the other hand, you could, like André Bazin, ask what is cinema?
Or you could go further, as the French
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:40, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Bob W wrote:
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:26, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Same goes for what is a movie?
That one's easy. It's a sequence of photographs replayed at 14fps.
On the other hand, you could,
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:34, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote:
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:26, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Same goes for what is a movie?
That one's easy. It's a sequence of photographs replayed at 14fps
Ahem, 24fps. Slo-mo is frowned upon.
B
On the other hand, you
On 1/26/2014 11:34 AM, Bob W wrote:
On 26 Jan 2014, at 16:26, J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net wrote:
Same goes for what is a movie?
That one's easy. It's a sequence of photographs replayed at 14fps.
On the other hand, you could, like André Bazin, ask what is cinema? Or you
could go
Go you one better -- What is reality?
My definition: a photograph is art and/or documentary or somewhere in
between. (Thinking of the Photojournalism thread.)
Physical objects are easy. A chair is a chair. A photo of a chair is a
photo of a chair.
But what is a war/a protest march/an
I think my head's going to explode.
cheers,
frank
eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
My definition: a photograph is art and/or documentary or somewhere in
between. (Thinking of the Photojournalism thread.)
Physical objects are easy. A chair is a chair. A photo
I skimmed it, there may actually be a new thought in there, but it's not
worth my while to find out.
On 1/26/2014 11:18 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
An article in today’s Times that’s relevant to recent discussions:
I read it thoroughly. It was worth my while.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:38 PM, P.J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
I skimmed it, there may actually be a new thought in there, but it's not
worth my while to find out.
On 1/26/2014 11:18 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
An article in
On Jan 26, 2014, at 1:26 PM, knarf knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
I think my head's going to explode.
cheers,
frank
Hold on Frank - I’ll be right over to take a photo of that event… I suspect it
will be a subjective interpretation.
stan
eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better --
I'll take a selfie of the event. That will be subject too.
But it will be a representation of a real event...
:-)
Cheers,
frank
Stanley Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote:
On Jan 26, 2014, at 1:26 PM, knarf knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
I think my head's going to explode.
cheers,
Meant to say it will be subjective, too...
Cheers
frank
Stanley Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote:
On Jan 26, 2014, at 1:26 PM, knarf knarftheria...@gmail.com wrote:
I think my head's going to explode.
cheers,
frank
Hold on Frank - I’ll be right over to take a photo of that
We aim to please.
Marnie aka Doe ;-)
In a message dated 1/26/2014 10:26:53 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
knarftheria...@gmail.com writes:
I think my head's going to explode.
cheers,
frank
eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
My definition: a photograph is art
On Jan 26, 2014, at 1:03 PM, eactiv...@aol.com wrote:
Go you one better -- What is reality?
My definition: a photograph is art and/or documentary or somewhere in
between. (Thinking of the Photojournalism thread.)
And according to some of the art museum curators interviewed for the
Yes I found that part intriguing. Hadn't thought about it, now I might try
it. (i.e. scanner image/collage).
Marnie aka Doe :-) It was an interesting article, Paul.
In a message dated 1/26/2014 1:27:16 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
pnstenqu...@comcast.net writes:
And according to some of
I think that putting leaves or other items on a sensitized material and
exposing to light, used to be called something like photogram. There
was a scientific play kit that came with plastic negatives a frame
to hold the paper and of course a light sensitive paper that turned sort
of purple
Interesting. Never heard of that, at all.
Marnie Still amused by exploding heads, subject photographs of said
event, and/or selfies of said event, which will be an actual objective event.
Or something like that. :-)
In a message dated 1/26/2014 3:18:57 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
Hi,
[...]
There is another definition that I'd like to bring to the
consideration of honorable assembly.
Art is something you remember after being exposed to.
[...]
The point being, if you're exposed to something that makes you think
and/or feel different and you remember it some
På 8. mai. 2005 kl. 09.53 skrev Bob W:
Hi,
[...]
There is another definition that I'd like to bring to the
consideration of honorable assembly.
Art is something you remember after being exposed to.
[...]
The point being, if you're exposed to something that makes you think
and/or feel different and
Hi!
first time I've thought a kick in the balls might be art...
Yes of course. Art, Martial Art... wink
--
Boris
- Original Message -
From: Bob W
Subject: RE: what makes a photograph art...
first time I've thought a kick in the balls might be art...
It needs to be done with a certain amount of style to make it that far.
William Robb
BW Personally, I have never really understood why people feel the need to
BW categorise things as art or not-art, or even as good, bad and indifferent
BW art. I would rather approach the object or performance in question, and
BW examine my own reaction to it, the reactions of other people, and its
Hi!
Background: I bought Bill Fortney's Great Photography Workshop book a
while back. In the book, Bill recommended another one called Developing
The Creative Edge in Photography by Bert Eifer. That book contains
some interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what makes a photograph
'art
on these
definitions. Do you disagree with any of them?
what makes a photograph art...?
the image it holds
Rob Studdert
HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA
Tel +61-2-9554-4110
UTC(GMT) +10 Hours
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/
Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Background: I bought Bill Fortney's Great Photography Workshop book a
while back. In the book, Bill recommended another one called Developing
The Creative Edge in Photography by Bert Eifer. That book contains
some interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what makes a photograph
'art
Developing The Creative Edge in Photography by Bert Eifer. That
book contains some interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what makes
a photograph 'art.' These definitions are compiled by Mr. Eifer and
are not necessarily his. These are some of the definitions:
art pleases the eye
art brings
They all work for me.
Thanks for posting.
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: what makes a photograph art...
Background: I bought Bill Fortney's Great Photography Workshop book a
while back. In the book, Bill recommended another one called
Paul Stenquist replied to my message about art definitions:
That's a very narrow definition. It would exclude many of those works
hanging on the walls of the world's museums.
Agreed. We could also debate whether a great many of those works are
actually art. G
Art can create disharmony. It can
Collin Brendemuehl wrote:
There was a time when art was reduced to include any and all
expressions and the term really became meaningless. There was nothing
to distinguish art from non-art. It was wholely subjective.
I don't know if the term is meaningless. There is a lot of wiggle room
in
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only real test of great universal art is time. If a work
endures and speaks to every generation, one can say that it is great
art: a classic.
Oh goody, I love these types of discussions -- aesthetics! My
background and attitudes about art are
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 6. maj 2005 13:35
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: what makes a photograph art...
Background: I bought Bill Fortney's Great Photography
2005 14:06
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: what makes a photograph art...
That's a very narrow definition. It would exclude many of those works
hanging on the walls of the world's museums. Art can create disharmony.
It can provoke and inspire chaos. It can be ambiguous or
straightforward
Friday, May 6, 2005, 2:06:28 PM, Paul wrote:
PS That's a very narrow definition. It would exclude many of those works
PS hanging on the walls of the world's museums. Art can create disharmony.
PS It can provoke and inspire chaos. It can be ambiguous or
PS straightforward and clear. And of course
TR Art can create disharmony. It can provoke and inspire chaos.
TR That's an interesting thought. An image can definitely do that. Can an
TR image that does so be considered art? Those who support the Mapplethorpe
TR type confrontational art would probably say that it can. I'm not so sure.
How
: Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2005/05/06 Fri AM 11:34:48 GMT
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Subject: what makes a photograph art...
Background: I bought Bill Fortney's Great Photography Workshop book a
while back. In the book, Bill recommended another one called Developing
On 5/6/05, Collin Brendemuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Art. Hmmm. Good question.
There was a time when art was reduced to include any and all expressions
and the term really became meaningless. There was nothing to distinguish art
from non-art. It was wholely subjective.
It's
, anyway :-).
Jens Bladt
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 6. maj 2005 14:06
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: what makes a photograph art...
That's a very narrow
It's time for everyone to go out and rent Pecker, don't you think, Shel?
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 6. maj 2005 14:06
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: what makes a photograph art...
That's a very narrow definition. It would exclude many of those works
hanging on the walls of the world's museums. Art can create disharmony.
It can provoke and inspire
Art tends to invioke an emotonal response of some sort from the person it is
inflicted on.
William Robb
LOL ABSOLUTELY! (And to think I almost deleted this message. Thanks
for the chuckle)
BTW, the DVD has a nice special feature that discusses the making of the
photos used in the movie.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Doug Brewer
It's time for everyone to go out and rent Pecker, don't you
Based on these definitions, Art is a guy. It's early in the morning,
He needs a shave.
and he's single...
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
Art is painful to look at
Art is disruptive
More likely than not.
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Based on these definitions, Art is a guy. It's early in the morning,
He needs a shave.
and he's single...
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
Art
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:49:50AM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote:
Art is painful to look at
Art is disruptive of normality
Art questions, reduces and simplifies our experience of life
Art is clear, straightforward and uncomplicated.
Based on these definitions,
, Bill recommended another one called
Developing The Creative Edge in Photography by Bert Eifer. That
book contains some interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what makes
a photograph 'art.' These definitions are compiled by Mr. Eifer and
are not necessarily his. These are some of the definitions
På 6. mai. 2005 kl. 15.58 skrev UncaMikey:
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only real test of great universal art is time. If a work
endures and speaks to every generation, one can say that it is great
art: a classic.
I agree with Paul, time is the only true test. I believe art
Doesn't make it any less art, though. If you find it boring does that mean
it's no longer art, or a work of importance? Is Peter Max's work no longer
art? Is Warhol's soup can any less (or more) than it once was.
Sensibilities and culture change with time. Many things fall in and out of
attempts to answer this question, and
explain why they have failed, and why it is really the wrong question to be
asking.
It's impossible to answer the specific question 'what makes a photograph
art' because it presupposes a workable definition of art. And there isn't
one. If there was, nobody
Art, needs to be in a frame. That way we know when the Art stops the wall
begins.
-Frank Zappa
VBG
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: DagT [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
The first two defines the opposite to what I see as art. The pleasing
That´s my point. Monet may still be art, as well as Warhol, even if
the test of time says otherwise.
The test of time only tells us about the current trends and views on
history, not about the value or definition of art.
DagT
På 6. mai. 2005 kl. 20.08 skrev Shel Belinkoff:
Doesn't make it any
interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what makes
a photograph 'art.' These definitions are compiled by Mr. Eifer and
are not necessarily his. These are some of the definitions:
art pleases the eye
art brings order to chaos - it creates harmony
art clarifies, intensifies or enlarges our
In other words, an image need only elicits a glandular
reaction in order to qualify as art.
Don't they all?
Jack
--- John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:49:50AM -0400, P. J.
Alling wrote:
Art is painful to look at
Art is disruptive of normality
Also, it seems that, Art is pretentious!
Actually I think that anything the person who produced it thinks is art, is art. Now
whether it is Good Art is another question altogether. On the other hand my
father was Art, it said so on his birth certificate. Come to think of it he was often
Good art may be annoying, bad art is pretentious, pretty and boring...
DagT
På 6. mai. 2005 kl. 21.14 skrev Graywolf:
Also, it seems that, Art is pretentious!
Actually I think that anything the person who produced it thinks is
art, is art. Now whether it is Good Art is another question
Waller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 6. maj 2005 20:22
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: Re: what makes a photograph art...
Art, needs to be in a frame. That way we know when the Art stops the wall
begins.
-Frank Zappa
VBG
Kenneth Waller
-Original Message-
From: DagT [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: DagT
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
Good art may be annoying, bad art is pretentious, pretty and boring...
So by your definition, good art must also be ugly?
William Robb
On 6/5/05, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
Personally, I have never really understood why people feel the need to
categorise things as art or not-art, or even as good, bad and indifferent
art. I would rather approach the object or performance in question, and
examine my own reaction to it, the
John Francis wrote:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:49:50AM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote:
Art is painful to look at
Art is disruptive of normality
Art questions, reduces and simplifies our experience of life
Art is clear, straightforward and uncomplicated.
Based on these
På 6. mai. 2005 kl. 22.30 skrev William Robb:
- Original Message - From: DagT Subject: Re: what makes a
photograph art...
Good art may be annoying, bad art is pretentious, pretty and boring...
So by your definition, good art must also be ugly?
Only if it isn´t annoying .-)
But as you
by Bert Eifer. That
book contains some interesting (to me at least) thoughts on what
makes a photograph 'art.' These definitions are compiled by Mr.
Eifer and are not necessarily his. These are some of the definitions:
art pleases the eye
art brings order to chaos - it creates harmony
art clarifies
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
On 5/6/05, Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
art pleases the eye
Some of the most moving art I've seen (including photos) is repulsive and ugly.
art brings order to chaos - it creates harmony
Some art seems to me
A frame.
Regards,
Bob...
A picture is worth a thousand words,
but it uses up three thousand times the memory.
But what about bad art? It won't stand the test of time, but it's still
called art - just not good art. If it has a frame, it's art.
Regards,
Bob...
A picture is worth a thousand words,
but it uses up three thousand times the memory.
From:
Every art has it's accepted display.
For photographs, paintings, drawings, etc., it's a frame.
For sculpture, it's a pedestal.
For music, dancing, theatre, etc., it's a stage.
For literature, poetry, etc., it's a binding.
For jewelry, it's a finger.
etc.
Regards,
Bob...
--- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
About the all I can say about art is that it's a form of
communication
that seeks to explain the world and the universe and our experience
within, in ways that may not be expressed or expressable in other
ways. Poor definition, I know, but this
On 5/6/05, UncaMikey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quite good, Frank. I like it. But I was hoping that you would simply
edit your sig line, and say Art is a bourgeois concept. And then we
could pretend we were sitting around a table in a cafe in Paris in
1904, drinking absinthe and eagerly
-Original Message-
From: Tom Reese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
art brings order to chaos - it creates harmony
This one seems to have very limited application.
There is so much art that isn't about order and harmony.
--
Peter Williams
84 matches
Mail list logo
