I think I found the (previously unknown, apparently) source for the Shepard Fairey "Hope" poster. I stretched the
original a bit (really, a tiny amount) and flipped it horizontally,
but didn't need to rotate it at all.
A few minutes of Google image searching (for obama 2007) after reading this is all it took.
It looks like my match, while close enough to fool me & tons of other people, was actually the wrong image. A better match is linked to in stevesimula's comment, below.
dave z franzese, Weston Deboer, and 23 other people added this photo to their favorites.
View 7 more comments
Lost in Transit [Keep St Joe Weird] 54 months ago | reply
I doubt Shepard Fairey will pay royalties or even attribute the original picture. He's notorious for ripping off artists & photographers with no regards for copyrights--until someone uses his images, then a storm of lawyers descend.
stevesimula 54 months ago | reply
Nope, I don't think so. Check out the image on this page and tell me it's not the correct photograph: intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com/2006/10/reminiscing-a...
twoeightnine 54 months ago | reply
fraud!!!! haha. i think steve's right. they line up almost perfectly when you tilt shepard's design including the tie and shadowing.
anatayw 54 months ago | reply
they're VERY similar, i think the second pic at the link is a better match, after you rotate it about 5 degrees and stretch it a little. takes a little away from the argument that since "flipping and re-orienting it, adding jacket, tie", it falls squarely within fair use parameters (the pic already contained a jacket and tie and didn't need to be flipped).
still love the print!
tweenina 54 months ago | reply
Good work, Cramer!!
stevesimula 54 months ago | reply
For my photo analysis of this mystery, check this out: www.flickr.com/photos/25105505@N07/3212113517/
By the way, I still love the print as well.
[ PROCESS ] 54 months ago | reply
Actually, I think this is the real photo: i29.photobucket.com/albums/c290/trebor007/image_3655004.jpg
The one above looks really close, but the rotation of the head is just slightly off, which may be why you had to stretch it just that little bit. Looking at the image in this comment alongside the HOPE poster the features match up almost seemelessly. Look closely at the shape of his tie, collar, where the shadows lie, etc.
[ PROCESS ] 54 months ago | reply
this pretty much sums it up:
www.flickr.com/photos/25105505@N07/3212113517/
richeee313 54 months ago | reply
Very cool and good job!
www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-19/who-to...
Lost in Transit [Keep St Joe Weird] 54 months ago | reply
@ anatayw:
Shepard Fairey's poster doesn't fall under fair use practice ascribed to Jim Young's photo.
He refuses to attribute his source, saying only that he found it on Google. He is profitting from the image and also has put a differing copyright on his version nullifying the 'share alike' use license.
"Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work)."
Share Alike. If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.
stefyania 54 months ago | reply
scandal
www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-19/who-to...
anatayw 54 months ago | reply
@lost: i was quoting what is in the dailybeast story as to why it's believed Fairey's poster WOULD fall under fair use, not stating my opinion on the matter. i'm not familiar enough with fair use and its practices to say either way.
and yes, i'm positive he could've put more effort into finding the source.
Never Original 54 months ago | reply
Please be original....
www.aphotoeditor.com/2009/01/20/photograph-obama-hope-pos...
gretaschmidt 54 months ago | reply
i think many are forgetting that there are probably thousands of photos of Obama just like the images mentioned above. it has to be said that anyone taking an image of Obama at that angle would get the same result. though the appropriate acknowledgments should be made by fairey, who is to say that the image is particular to a photographer's style or technique? in my opinion, the photographer did not influence the image of Obama. it is merely his face, which is not "copywriteable"
i suppose if the original photograph itself was so memorable, we'd be making IT the face of the campaign - instead of fairey's illustration.
interesting, nonetheless!
Contrabass 53 months ago | reply
In today's Boston Globe, some controversy about this image:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/outofline/2009/02/how_phony_is_shepard_fairey.html
gretaschmidt 53 months ago | reply
thanks for the link - interesting article..with more interesting comments.
i think its noted to say that all artists have influences..be it obvious or not. what about Warhol or Lichtenstein? Even better are the statements that reference the software: "It's not even difficult to do with all of the software out there that makes even the artistically challenged look good" -haha, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard!!!!!
twoeightnine 53 months ago | reply
and the best article on it.
www.supertouchart.com/2009/02/02/editorial-the-medium-is-...
gretaschmidt 53 months ago | reply
wow. what about fonts? and illustration or photography that we use from stock sites? that is someone else's work. should we cease all use of helvetica because Max Miedinger developed it first? i find it hard to believe that people don't see that all art or design is, in some way, a derivative of others people's work. i suppose it depends on what kind of "art" it is...and if people are making a living from it...
Lost in Transit [Keep St Joe Weird] 53 months ago | reply
the use of a font, like helvetica, isn't infringement on any rights or properties. Merely because acknowledging that it is helvetica you're using, you have referenced your source. Whereas, Fairey refuses to so with this and many other prints he's leached from other people.
Personally, I think copyright law is a sham and creative commons is highly superior, but Fairey is notorious for crying infringement when someone uses his images for profit. Images he "borrowed" and derived from other artists, as highlighted in this interview: www.motherjones.com/interview/2008/03/interview-shepard-f...
twoeightnine 44 months ago | reply