|
|
|
Recently a friend sought me out to help critique a new batch of images he had just printed. Beautiful work. Crisp, saturated clean Ilfochromes in 16x20 to 20x30 size. Very nice work that involved a lot of hiking and walking and (in some instances) the hiring of Indian guides in Monument Valley and Canyon De Chelly.
Trouble is, I had seen every image before.
My friend did a very good job. David Muench had done it better.
Every one of the twenty or so prints he showed me were almost the exact same view of David Muench photographs from recent books that I was puzzled in looking at the prints. I just knew they were very familiar and then one image in particular hit me: it was the cover shot of a Dave Muench book. I reviewed each image carefully and later looked at a couple of Dave's recent books and found each image there. Each one was better, clearly exhibiting the talent, hard work and unique vision Dave has.
I was quite disappointed in this friend.
This is not a new phenomona. It isn't illegal as far as I know though certainly questionable in a copyright sense. It is immoral as hell though and no reputable photographer would ever do it.
Direct copying is a slimy business.
I am not talking here of making pilgramiges to the 'shrine' locations made famous by Ansel Adams, David Muench, Morley Baer, the Westons and so many others.
A trip to see where the masters captured memorable images can be a great learning experience. We all do it from time to time. We even try our hand at their composition. For most of us the image is a pale comparison and serves to increase the admiration we have for the efforts of those who photographed before us. Even when we get an excellent image which is as good or maybe even 'better' than our heroes we give credit where due. "This is one I saw from AA(or whomever) and I went to where he shot & this is what I got."
We don't say "This is my image" while keeping quiet about the history that needs to go with it.
Many go to Monument Valley and shoot the mittens from the parking lot, getting essentially the same shot as Adams just as he got essentially the same shot as others before him. Others after us will do the same thing, the image is there a few feet off the parking lot and anyone with vision will see it. The main wonder is why everyone who visits doesn't see it? It fairly blasts one between the eyes. Yet in reality, few shoot the scene.
For those who do-Is it copying?
It certainly wasn't for me as when I shot the scene it was cold(-8 farenheit), windy(15-25mph gusts) and I had not yet seen the Ansel Adams image of the scene. It was only years later that I saw it. Boy, was I pleased with myself, seeing a scene with vision so similar to one of my heroes.
I didn't go to the area with a book in hand, looking for landmarks, triangulating on them until I found the location. Then carefully picking through a passel of lenses to try and match someone else's vision.
I have my own vision. That it matched Ansel Adams at times is pleasing to me, maybe more than it should be. I don't know about that. But I do know that directly and deliberately copying others work, vision and efforts is nothing more than a rip off, it is not talent.
It is also more work than being creative.(though no substitute, no matter how good the image turns out) And yes, it just might also be copyright infringement. Getting THAT specific really looks that way to me. But, it is a sad commentary on the morons who shoot that way.
Some scenes are so famous and the viewpoints so few that almost everyone who happens on them shoots the same thing whether they have ever heard of Adams, Wm. Henry Jackson or anyone else in the photographic world. Try the bends of the Snake River with the Tetons in the background. Every sunset sees a parking lot gathering that would have many a preacher jealous. It is 'there'. Almost impossible to miss. And, yes, a number are there simple because Ansel shot it. They shoot it, are disappointed and that is pretty much it.
Others aren't satisfied with that experience. They deliberately copy, over and over and over. Not for a learning experience. Not out of admiration. They are basically thieves at worst, picture takers with no confidence at best.
It is better to be mediocre on your own than be thought good by dishonest means. That is my firm opinion. Being a 'serial copycat' is dishonest.
It happens all too often.
Recently a good friend was judging an international open competition of outdoor and wildlife photography. I talked with him about it afterwards and got his take on a lot of the work. "I've seen it before", was the take on many images. Three he names stuck out plainly. Three "David Muench scenics" that were direct copies of the lens, viewpoint and location. Excellent photos but certainly not original work. One, maybe. But three? Again, all three the Desert Southwest. Monument Valley. White Sands and The Painted Desert. Same shot, same view, same perspective, same everything. Only thing different was the weather and the growth of some shrubs.
A blatant rip-off. Then the photographer had the temerity to complain about his work not being accepted. "This work is the best stuff around, much better than what hung in the show". And, he was right. But it certainly was not his work.
We all have our favorite locations and our favorite images that others(as well as ourselves) have photographed. Some areas are so highly photographed by well known photographers(Yosemite and AA) that everywhere you look you seem to be tripping over bronzed tripod holes. I personally find it difficult to shoot some scenes in Yosemite due to the work of Ansel Adams. Many view are, to me, his views and I can't normally get the feeling of creating my own image with so many of his in my mind. So, those I look at, maybe shoot one or two, and then concentrate on my own vision-shooting something different or in a different location. Yet even in Yosemite you see the people looking for the AA viewpoints. It is cheaper and more satisfying in most instances to buy the prints from the gallery in the park. If you want Ansel's vision that is a good way to get it.
This comes down to ethics in photography. Many of us, I think most of us, will go to the same locations and come away with similar if not identical images. No harm in that. There are a few lowlife jerks who go to an area and then trash it so no one else will get "their" picture. I have been lucky enough not to run into these folks. I've been places after them though and it keeps me from giving 'special' locations to more than just a few close friends. Coming away from an area with the same of similar images isn't copying if we have seen the area with our own vision.
That is, for me, the key to photographing in the heavily visited areas. I go in and shoot a few stock, standard images that I know will benefit my stock files. But I really try to get a different point of view. Different lighting, angles or seasons. Not the 'same old thing' that gets done to death. I try to get my view of the place and at times I come back with macro images or the the 'intimate landscape' rather than the broad scenic. At times I can see specifically where David Muench and others have photographed from. Normally I don't shoot that view. I leave it to them. At times, such as Moro Rock in the Sierra Nevada, the 'stock view' is right THERE, just jumping out at you. To not shoot it is nearly impossible. So, I shoot it. Everyone does.
But, in doing so, are we copying each other? I don't think so. The shot is so obvious it isn't any one photographers image like some of the Ansel Adams views are. It belongs to all photographers.
The copycats, those who misappropriate others vision are the bottom dwellers of our profession/hobby. They deliberately copy. They take the books on location and seek out others vision, stealing views as surely as the thief who takes your truck in the night.
No one owns the views but it is a sad statement that with so much creativity in the world we have those who would steal even that. Walking to the right of left, getting higher or lower, choosing a different lens: none of it is that hard. I would think it is more work to be a copycat and certainly much less satisfying. Never really having a fine image that is yours alone. Never shooting a really good image and discovering later that Ansel or Weston or Muench had shot it. Finding your vision matches that of your heroes is a good feeling. Knowing your vision is reduces to the level of theft must make one feel pretty pathetic. Stealing isn't creativity.
This isn't anything new nor is it unique to photography. The world has always had second rate people who will appropriate the creativity of others, calling it their own. They often get away with it. Look at the wood carving of Jeffry Koons in his misappropriation of the photograph of "string of puppies" taken by Art Rodgers of Point Reyes Station, CA. That the courts eventually came out on the side of Art Rodgers did not change the fact that a "professional artist" took, without permission, the work of another. That is exactly what the copycats are doing.
No more, No less.
When you go out and shoot, be inspired by the images and vision of those whose work you enjoy. I often get to locations and recognize the images of others from having seen them. A lot of times I wonder how they saw them because my vision sees the scene differently. From a different viewpoint or needing a different time of year or different weather. I appreciate their vision and image, but it isn't mine. I go out and try to get my own images. I look at good work and get inspiration. I enjoy good images and seek them out. I often marvel at the diversity of vision, the interesting interpretation of areas I see completely differently than someone else. But, I leave them to their vision and I will take mine. As good as theirs is, it isn't mine. I'll take inspiration from it and leave their pictures for them while I try to see the places with my eyes, my experience and my own view. The occasional duplication of vision will happen to all of us. After all, creative minds to run in similar tracks. But creativity dies when one doesn't work on it and deliberately copies the works of others.
If you are going to show work, show your own work. Develop your own talent. Hone your own skills. Take the occasional duplication in vision as a complement to your developing skills. Go to the famous locations and see just how the Masters were inspired. Shoot the views as you see them, whether similar or different. But shoot your vision. You won't be Ansel Adams or David Muench or Ernst Haas, but good or bad or inbetween, you won't be a thief either.