(1 to 100 of 124 replies)
Brian Labelle PRO 12:49pm, 24 December 2010
On the cover of The Toronto Star today, Dec. 24, there is an artist rendering of one of my photographs. There is no doubt that it was drawn from my photograph. Obviously the artist has added their own style so it is there own creation. It is quite flattering, although it would have been nice if the artist had told me.

Here is my picture

Snow Streetcars

and if you don't get the Toronto Star I've added a link.

(1 to 100 of 124 replies)
MissyV110 6 years ago
Brian - it's a gorgeous shot, and somehow it bothers me that the artist who used it as 'inspiration' neither contacted you nor acknowledged where the inspiration had come from........if I were you I might drop a note to the Toronto Star.
Sighthound 6 years ago
It is a derivative work of yours and hence is, legally speaking, copyright infringement. If it were me, I'd be pretty pissed that someone made $2,500 off my photograph without asking my permission first. I would write to the Star and ask for 50% of that prize money.
MissyV110 6 years ago
I am waiting for my comment at TorontoStar.com to be approved. I politely pointed to this photo as the basis for the painting. Quite politely, given how much this bugs me.

I'm with Sighthound, by the way.
MissyV110 6 years ago
From the contest rules:
By entering this Contest you acknowledge ....... In connection with your submission, you affirm, represent and warrant that: (i) the artwork is wholly original...

I would hope at least half of that $2500 is coming your way.
sniderscion PRO 6 years ago
I also have submitted a comment to the Star. I don't know if they'll actually publish as they tend to avoid commentary on their own miscues.

I'm sure that while it is gratifying to see your work being used (and it is a lovely image) it must be equally frustrating to see someone else getting credit for your vision. I would expect financial compensation from the artist as well. Ignorance of copyright law, as with any other, is no excuse.

I think I'll also write to their ombudsman.

Cheers Brian
Sighthound 6 years ago
Seriously... the more I look at it, the more it looks like she just ran your photo through a photoshop filter.
-nickon- PRO 6 years ago
That's not right.
MissyV110 6 years ago
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
I've posted a comment to the Star as well. I agree with what has been written so far. Actually, I like the original photo much better than the derivative work - it should have won the $2500.
MissyV110 6 years ago
Dave summed up exactly what I was thinking. Thanks, Dave.

a Facebook link to the painter, for your viewing pleasure:

MissyV110 Posted 6 years ago. Edited by MissyV110 (member) 6 years ago
they had allowed some gushy admiring comments five minutes ago - now ALL comments have been removed.

is the Star legal department changing from their pj's (wrapping gifts with the kids) and heading downtown to the office on Christmas Eve?

One wonders.
Sighthound 6 years ago
It is amazing how people think that if something is on the Internet, it is free for them to use.

It is equally amazing that people think they'll never be caught out.
Squeakyrat Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Squeakyrat (member) 6 years ago
That sucks. Its too similar unless she provides her original source. Unfortunately there are scum out there who like to steal ideas and photos.
PaladinPhil PRO 6 years ago

I just checked and there's still comments. Up to four at the moment.
*manda 6 years ago
so. not. cool.
the artist even says on her fb page that "many [of her pieces] are created based upon photos...".
i would definitely write directly to the star (and i would be happy to, too) - keep us posted!
MissyV110 6 years ago
Phil - grrrrrr - you're right - all the flattering comments are there. Our controversial ones remain unapproved (naturally).
PaladinPhil PRO 6 years ago
Hey it's the Toronto (Red) Star. Very few unflattering comments get through on the best of days.
MissyV110 6 years ago
Oh so true.
sevres-babylone PRO 6 years ago
It's pretty brazen theft. I mean, to not even change the out of focus headlights etc. Worse scenario is if they just disqualify the "winner" and give the prize to whoever is in second place. Even if they do that, the Star has clearly benefitted from your picture. I think you should get half, and some credit.
sevres-babylone PRO 6 years ago
From her facebook page:

"This is a collection of my pieces. Many are created based upon photos, some are not..."
Squeakyrat 6 years ago
Based on other people's photos. I've seen better art.
Lú_ PRO 6 years ago
I can't imagine the jurors will be pleased to find out that the winning work appears to be derivative, given the contest conditions.
-nickon- PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by -nickon- (member) 6 years ago
none of my comments are showing up the the star page.
perhaps they think it will all go away if they don't post our comments?

update: i asked where my comments are. i got a reply (below)

date Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 11:31 AM
subject Regarding your commenting submission
mailed-by thestar.ca

Thank you for submitting your comment to TheStar.com. Before we can publish a comment of this nature we must first investigate it further. I have sent your comment to the editors for review. Once they respond back, we can decide on whether to publish your comment.

We will get back to you shortly with the status of your comment.

Web Moderator

sniderscion PRO 6 years ago
A couple of Jurors addresses:

Charlie Kopun,
Art Director
Toronto Star:

Rudolf Bikkers
Professor, Drawing, Painting, Printmaking, Ontario College of Art and Design University.
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
If the Star isn't interested in posting your comments, you could always alert one of the many other Toronto papers. I'm sure the Sun in particular would have no qualms about covering a news story that paints the star in a negative light.
PaladinPhil PRO 6 years ago
Okay seven comments on the winning picture now. All glowing praises of the style, scene, and artist. I think Dave has the right idea about going somewhere else with this story. Hmmmm, I may have to blog on this...
Squeakyrat Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Squeakyrat (member) 6 years ago
11 comments now and they are well aware of the other comments.
Brian Labelle PRO 6 years ago
I must admit my bemusement this morning has slowly turned into indignation. I appreciate all your comments and understand how my particular case is representative of the rights of all photographers.

I have assembled my legal team, essentially all my friends that happened to be lawyers, and sent an email to The Star.

I'll keep you posted.

Still The Oldie PRO 6 years ago
Be tenacious!
JeffStewartPhotos PRO 6 years ago
"An artist’s nuts roasting in a Flickr forum,
Angry Flickr postings where we usually laugh,
General displeasure being sung for a chum,
About a painting that's just a dressed-up photograph.

"An original or a derivative, everyone should know,
We’ve got to help to make this clearer.
Star readers with their eyes all aglow,
The comments won’t bring wisdom any nearer.

"Before the ink on the cheque has been laid;
Not to Brian, but the borrower Kelly made.
And every Flickrite is going to spy,
Should stealing other artists do try.

"And so I'm offering this simple advice,
To “artists” who like to appropriate (or steal),
Although it has been said once, twice or thrice,
Make sure your artwork is yours for real."

[Thanks to Mel Tormé and Robert Wells, for writing "Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting On An Open Fire)", upon which this poem is based.]
hc916 6 years ago
We support you Brian!
Lizzie's Libation PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Lizzie's Libation (member) 6 years ago
Shameless. Pure thievery. Go get her, Brian.
(Oh, and I think the photo is better.)
Rob Cruickshank PRO 6 years ago
There was a recent fuss in National Geographic, when one of their photo contest winners was shown to be a photoshop creation. I think it's almost impossible for the people running these things to vet every submission for originality, people being what they are, but I think it's important for the Star, like National Geographic to step up and do the right thing when the error is pointed out. One place to send it if they don't is here:
Also, if that's the best painting they got, spare a few moments to think of the poor judges, who had to look at the thousands that were worse than that one.
-nickon- PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by -nickon- (member) 6 years ago
the star is aware of the situation. i'm sure they're working on a resolution.
there's a star reporter currently investigating.
Squeakyrat Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Squeakyrat (member) 6 years ago
"The Heavy" and "sevres-babylone" are on the Star comment page with links.
sniderscion PRO 6 years ago
Cleverly done!
csimmons44 6 years ago
That vantage point happens thousnds of times a day, I very much anyone "discovered it first"....oh well, you got some nice publicity out of it.
JoeyS4B PRO 6 years ago
As someone pointed out earlier, it looks like they used GIMP or Photoshop and just applied some form of abstract filter to your picture. It now seems likely that the The Star will take some kind of action, hopefully splitting the prize with you.
BruceK PRO 6 years ago
"I’m sorry if I offended somebody — that wasn’t my intention. I spent hours painting this painting,” says Kelley Turgeon in the Star's followup story.

Just because it takes a few hours to copy someone's work doesn't absolve you of responsibility for the act.
mz_thing Posted 6 years ago. Edited by mz_thing (member) 6 years ago
The Star's winning painting -- which might more properly be called a "paint-by-pixels" -- is quite obviously not an original work but an attempt to transform your photographic image into another medium (acrylic). The lumpy, even distorted representation of your picture (right down to the identical bokeh streetcar tail lights) is what makes the claim that her piece is original so problematic to me. If she were simply practicing her ability to paint something she saw (whether the streetcars themselves or your photo of them) I'd say fine; after all, you didn't have to give the TTC anything to simply take the photo. But to submit it for a contest and claim that her image was an original idea and then to profit from it ... not so much.

Hope this "exposure" gets her win revoked and teaches her a lesson.
Brian Labelle PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Brian Labelle (member) 6 years ago
The Toronto Star has written a story in which I participated. I think it is fairly well balanced and addressed a lot of concerns raised in this thread.


A print version for the Toronto Star on Dec. 26th will show the pictures side by side.

ronnys_fn_world 6 years ago
Are you telling me that a generic photo of TTC street cars is your original piece of art?

though it is a nice photo, there is nothing original about it.

i've seen many different pieces of art depicting TTC street cars. Most of them look like the photo you have taken.

Get over it. She did a great job of painting a Toronto icon.
Lizzie's Libation PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Lizzie's Libation (member) 6 years ago
After reading her response, I'm even more disgusted. She did not and could not have experienced the bokeh in your photograph... or come up with that exact composition without it. It may have been, as she says, one of dozens... but in the end she chose to copy your photo. Clearly an infringement. I wonder how many other photos on flickr she considered copying? How many hours she spent painting a copy of your photo is irrelavent. And the mention of this as a pseudo-apology is an insult to all photographers.
upcloseinthe city 6 years ago
You are absolutely right Brian. She should have acknowledged where she got the image, asked your permission and given you credit.
BTW: I think the photo is superior to the painting. The Star should run it the same size in the next edition!
Complain to the paper's public editor, Kathy English.
*Muhammad* 6 years ago
As I compare the two, this is clearly an infringement. I think it's time someone should take a legal step to protect all photographers. I think you are in a perfect position to take it further.
barton99 6 years ago
This is no different than sampling someone's music and using it in your own. COPYRIGHT VIOLATION.

Her comments are audacious, she should come clean and admit that she ripped you off.
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
I have to agree with Lizzie's Libation. The least that she could have done is admitted to have copied the work and apologized for trying to pass it off as her own original creation. I mean come on, that whole story about being influenced by riding in street cars on school trips? It was painted straight from the photo - right down to the out-of-focus car in the middle and the street car on the left being partially out of frame - not from some supposed childhood memory.

And for that matter, the article says nothing about what the Star plans to do about this or what their take is on the matter.
I prefer the photo...
-- brian cameron -- 6 years ago
Shocking. Just goes to show us that the average person doesn't understand copyright. Great photo, by the way.
*manda 6 years ago
i'm in total agreement with lizzie and dave. ugh.
*manda 6 years ago
also, i noticed there is not an option to comment on the "apology" (massive airquotes) article? ha.
etherflyer PRO 6 years ago
I laid the image above over the image in the Star, and the overlap was pretty astounding. If one of my students submitted something like that we'd be having a discussion about the difference between inspiration and copying.

I animated the overlays. It really leaps out at you:
JeffStewartPhotos PRO 6 years ago
... and the Star posted a copy of Brian's photo on their own website and did not allow for linking back to Flickr.
upcloseinthe city 6 years ago
There is a Flickr link in the body of the story.

I have written to the public editor. IMO The Star should publish the photo with credit and pay the photog the same prize money they paid their winner.

The senior editors are undoubtedly off for the holiday. Let us see what next week brings.

You can e-mail the public editor here:


She is an ombudsperson.
infringenot 6 years ago
Your right, the artist should have let you know about using the photo for inspiration or rendering as she saw it. However I would just take it in stride. Your never know some engineer/designer probably thought your photo of his or her design of the toronto street car was an infringement on their rights as artists as well...
dreamcake5 6 years ago
I am an amateur photographer I even I can tell this a knockoff. The Star has had a long tradition of not accepting plagarized work. What is the probability of someone dreaming up in their head the exact same visual perspective and composition down to the detail of the bi-colour headlights of the tailing vehicle--try one in several million (even that is too low). Kelley Turgeon may have looked at dozens of pictures but it was Mr. Labelle's picture she decided to settle on and copy. She better come clean on this soon because the truth will inevitably come out.

I guess the Star, after exposing so many cover-ups and scandals, never would have thought they would be in the middle of one. If you award half the prize to Ms. Turgeon, then it sends the message it is still okay to copy without acknowledgment.

I would suggest The Star do the right thing and take away the award from Ms. Turgeon and award it in full to Mr. Labelle.

The Star would lose all credibility if it does not take the most ethical course of action which would be to totally denounce what Ms. Turgeon did and strip her of her award. May I remind the Star it has fired past editors who have plagarized work.
JeffStewartPhotos PRO 6 years ago
Does Ms. Turgeon's comment that she "drew inspiration from Labelle’s photo" include tracing his photograph, or painting over a projection of his photograph? That is how I did art when I was ten years of age.

As Brian did not enter the contest, the award should go to the second place finisher Suzanne Del Rizzo of Oakville, Ontario.
~*~vicki was here~*~ PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by ~*~vicki was here~*~ (member) 6 years ago
I just saw this on the Star website, it's so obvious she traced the image, right down to the headlights of the car behind the streetcar!!
sniderscion PRO 6 years ago
The overlay that etherflyer posted above is extremely compelling and if anyone had any doubts about the degree to which this is a blatant copy compared to an "inspiration" they will be removed by viewing it. Stellar work IMHO.
Squeakyrat 6 years ago
Thanks etherflyer.
.Allan 6 years ago
"Wholly original" ? Hardly. I would hope this works out in your favour Brian.
Cody-James 6 years ago
This is a shame.. I love how she even coloured the head lights yellow and white on the truck to the left of the rear cart.
ICT_photo 6 years ago
I've had people use my work for such "inspiration" in the past. To the best of my knowledge they have not profited from it. Were I to find out that they did however...... yeah, I'd be pissed!
Dawid Werminski 6 years ago
i'm interested in seeing how this pans out.

my guess: kelly's submission gets tossed and she loses the money on the grounds that the work is not wholly original.

2nd place gets a nice boxing week spending spree.
Infuzion Photography 6 years ago
wow, merry xmas! I'm surprised at the contest winner's response.
eadlers PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by eadlers (member) 6 years ago
Just read the story this morning and I can't believe the gall of the "artist."
You have my support all the way Brian.

Love the shot BTW! (Let's not lose track of why Flickr exists.)
Sighthound 6 years ago
Well, I'm glad that you got the Star to take you seriously, but I can't believe Kelley's response. What a child!
Hyla Levy PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Hyla Levy (member) 6 years ago
Smart, ain't she? Copy somebody else's work knowing it could end up on the cover of Canada's largest paper and thinking nobody would notice.

I don't think she's in legal danger because the alterations have been extensive; ethically, however.....
Joanne Dale PRO 6 years ago
“I have a lot of respect for other artists and I would never intentionally rip off somebody else’s work,” she says.

Sleep-painting. Again.
416films 6 years ago
Lol at waddling between bemusement and indignation. This whole fatuous affair is axiomatic of pettiness, rapacious materialism and hypocrisy by all involved. Seemingly, the Star, the art work, and the snapshot deserve each other.
art sky 6 years ago
Perhaps you owe credit to the designer of the streetcar also? I don't think the painter owes an apology or the Star. You should feel flattered and move on.
JMCDA 6 years ago
In the art circles I move in, as a profession artist for the majority of my life, it is accepted knowledge that originality begins at the conception of the thought or idea and that as an artist you should be able to back up your thought process through notes, sketches, thumbnails as well as YOUR OWN original photography. this young woman did not in any way create an original work of art - she has created a derivitive work from your original photography. It is blatant copyright infringement and she should be stripped of her award. If I was one of the artists who had entered this contest I would be doing a dance on somebodys desk at the Star until they fix this - no, it isn't their fault as no way could they have known, but they still have to fix it and give the award to someone who deserves it.
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
your argument might hold water if Brian had reproduced an exact copy of a streetcar and was profiting off of it. Using something as an element of a composition is different from copying the entire composition.

I wonder how the painter would feel about someone photographing her paintings and profiting off of the photographs.
MissyV110 Posted 6 years ago. Edited by MissyV110 (member) 6 years ago
ArtSky - the photographer should feel flattered by having his photo copied as if it were a paint-by-number, and the copier receiving $2500?... where is the logic there?

And - where is the photographer's hypocrisy here? Really, what are you talking about?? Man takes photo, posts to flickr - painter sees it on flickr, and recreates said photo in acrylic, (down to the details of light and perspective, not "Inspired By", rather "Directly Derived From") enters the painting into a contest which states works must be "wholly original".

I'd really like to understand where you see any hypocrisy on the photographer's part in this scenario.

Derek Flack 6 years ago
blogTO has a post about the controversy:

ronnys_fn_world 6 years ago

The photo and the painting of the TTC street cars have no originality to them.

They are both generic depictions.

the composition is gineric as well.

i have taken thousands of photos and not one of them is original and/or special. Why? Because they are all of everyday occurances.

There is no way of placing the title of originality, on a photo of a common event.

she probaly won the contest because, the "PAINTING" of TTC street cars, looked pleasing. Which it does.

You people should give it a rest, there are far more important forms of theft out there. This is not one of them.
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
clearly, you don't understand copyright. Whether or not the photo is generic (or 'gineric', as you call it), the photographer still owns the rights to it, and a derivative work is in violation of the photographer's copyright.

As to the comments that people should 'move on' or 'give it a rest', sorry but I"m not about to step back and say that reusing someone's photograph without permission is acceptable.
DaveHook PRO 6 years ago
See this (Copyright FAQ re painting a photograph):
Hyla Levy PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Hyla Levy (member) 6 years ago
You can see the 9 runners-up here.

I wonder if they specifically chose something that didn't depict Christmas imagery. The theme was "Winter Holidays in Toronto."
MissyV110 Posted 6 years ago. Edited by MissyV110 (member) 6 years ago
DaveHook - Clearly, indeed.
MissyV110 6 years ago
Toronto Star Facebook page

Comments seem to be welcome there.
etherflyer PRO 6 years ago
New Flickr account, no photos, only belongs to one group, no contacts, no real name… Sock puppet? Troll?

I'm not a lawyer — I don't have an informed opinion on whether Turgeon violated Canadian copyright law. I would hope, though, that the professional curators and art professor on the judging panel don't consider that simply copying an image in a different medium is creating a wholly original work of art. By that standard, one of my students could read aloud a newspaper article in class and claim it was their original work.
zenaissance 6 years ago

It is easy for you to sit and type and tell everyone to take it easy because if you were the photographer you would not think the same. Put yourself in someone else's shoes and then think again- how would you feel? Generic? Clearly you lack any understanding of what is artistic. The photo is no masterpiece but it is far from generic. It is fairly distinctive. A common event? Did you ever go to art school? A lot of great art comes from capturing common events. The whole point isn't just about copyright but really comes down to not acknowledging someone else's work and claiming your work as your own. Go back to your armchair and leave the real comments to people who are clearly better informed than your ignorance.
Mike.Trent PRO 6 years ago
That painting is clearly a derivative work, and although some of us may not care if others derive and make flattering copies of our work - this one profited, did not attribute the original artist, was not an original idea, and was down right deceiving!
Still The Oldie PRO 6 years ago
@ Ronny's:

i have taken thousands of photos and not one of them is original and/or special.

Please don't make yourself this easy a target for us. We prefer a challenge...
postbear 6 years ago
it's bad enough that kelley turgeon committed the act, but her non-apology in the follow-up story is just absurd. the star could be somewhat excused for making an honest mistake, at first, but stripping her of the award really has to be the next step. then again, the paper that continues to employ rosie dimanno can't be said to have appreciable standards.
E$$PEE 6 years ago
I HAD to join this Group just to add...
Panchenks.... are you for real ffs? Your comment is the most stupid thing I have ever read, Dochebag of the day. Every day. For a year.
I would call you a fucking knobhead but I may get banned.
Sighthound 6 years ago
Anyone who says that someone should feel happy or honoured to have been ripped off is a frickin' idiot.
Panchenks 6 years ago
Fair enough. I didn't mean to offend the hardworking photogs on here who make a living off it; I just have a different opinion on the matter because I do it just for fun, and I've met a lot of photographers who are overprotective of their mediocre work (I'm in no way referring to Brian, his photo is good).

I'll remove my comment because it's pissing people off; that was not my intention. Sorry if I offended you, I was just was trying to bring a different opinion to the table.
postbear 6 years ago
while i do hope that Portraits Of Toronto is satisfied with the outcome of all this, maybe the best way to deal with ms. turgeon is with mockery. and so, after looking at dozens of photographs, i offer up this.
Ron Hay PRO 6 years ago
For what its worth, I too agree that it appears to be a derivative work rather than an original thought unless the 'artist' happened to be a the same spot at the same time with the same camera, lens, focal length and vision!
Hyla Levy PRO Posted 6 years ago. Edited by Hyla Levy (member) 6 years ago
I want to ask you something because I've heard people say that before and I just don't get it - have you never heard of art school? Do you not realize that some people spend four years of their time and tons of money to study visual arts (incl. photography)?

And I mean no disrespect to those who have not had formal education - anybody wanting the rights to their own images is absolutely valid;* whether or not they make money off it. And whether or not the work is mediocre is irrelevant.

(Bad English but it was off the top of my head.)

I like the Toronto Star! Car ads are what keeps newspapers going - or do you not believe in the printed press?
postbear 6 years ago
while the star is much better than the sun or the national post, it still has many failings. the news we get fed to us is entirely too corporate and is full of nonsense distractions, and it's rare that real news is reported or followed up on with any seriousness. and then there is rosie dimanno (among other columnists) who is just one bigoted ball of uneducated opinion unfettered by common sense or decency.

as for the car ads and the printing press, i am both amused and revolted by the daily crud tossed at us by two dying industries. daily papers are entering the graveyard and auto manufacturing and distribution is pretty vile, but that's a bit off-topic for this thread. i do think, though, that the star ought to be forced to deal with issues like these quickly and publicly, and the onus is on the public to bring it about.

we do agree on the central topic here, though - ms. turgeon acted badly.
Hyla Levy PRO 6 years ago
I think the Star was quick to publish (at least online) that comparison of the two pictures, so what's the rush? Lawyers have to be contacted and who knows what else, and it is the holidays. I mean no disrespect about the issue, but it isn't some issue of national security that needs to be dealt with right away, much as we'd like it to be.
barton99 6 years ago
I am sure that if the girl that ripped off this photo knew she would get this kind of grief for $2500 in cash, she might have thought otherwise about doing it.

Its unfortunate that apologies in our culture are viewed as weakness rather than strength. I liked her painting, too bad she ripped it off.

Anyone with half a brain will know this girl is a liar from here on in, and her credibility will always be questioned.
etherflyer PRO 6 years ago
i do think, though, that the star ought to be forced to deal with issues like these quickly and publicly, and the onus is on the public to bring it about.

On a statutory holiday they've put up a story, and promised to include it in the next print edition. That's pretty good for starters, and one couldn't really expect more.

It might well take more than a week for them to make a final decision, given how it's entirely probable that quite a few of those involved (editors and judges, as well as the artists, and possibly lawyers for all parties) are likely on holiday and harder to reach than normal.

If Brian Labelle is happy with their response so far, the rest of us shouldn't be getting upset about it :-)
postbear 6 years ago
you're both right, i think the issue is being handled by the paper fairly well so far. that the public hold the media to account is the principle i believe we should stick to, and i was simply affirming it here. too often the media simply switches from one story to another without thoroughly addressing issues, and though this is not, as has been pointed out, an issue of national security, i do think the paper ought to be required to detail further results as they happen.

posting a little on flickr isn't definitive of unhappiness - as i stated before, having the paper rescind the award and making mockery of ms. turgeon is punishment aplenty.
With a Hip 6 years ago
Visiting Kelley Turgeon's website, I noticed that another of her paintings (entitled "Two Steps Forward") is another "wholly original" work of art based on this image:

One of the first pictures that pops up when you google "high heels". Honestly, I don't even know what to say. She's obviously got cojones the size of melons to do something like this then not even apologize for it.
JeffStewartPhotos PRO 6 years ago
art sky Posted 6 years ago. Edited by art sky (member) 6 years ago
If you're that freaked by this perhaps you should stop posting flickr. As an artist myself I take inspiration from anywhere. This painter's intent wasn't I'll rip this photographers work. She saw the image and probably thought this could work well as painting. This whole planet works this way. Most houses look similar. Which one is the original? Your photo looks like so many I've seen too as does her painting, it's great photo don't get me wrong. Nothing is truly an original. I copy hockney's work as I do many others. But it's my spin. Your photo is just a spin off something you've seen already but it's your photo. The painting is a spin off your photo. I can understand that it bothers you but it's how it works.To me you should move on or stop posting work.
That's why rock sounds like rock and classical sounds like classical.
(1 to 100 of 124 replies)
Groups Beta