This whole thing about Adams photography is ridiculous. First of all there are lot of things that go into making a great photo. And I do not really want to get into it, but anyone who has ever approached photography in a serious way knows that Adams did not just go out somewhere and snap a photo and that was it. Time went into finding the right shot, using the correct filters if necessary, using the right film (size and speed), using the right exposure settings, using the right F-stop, waiting for the right light, maybe coming back the next day when the light is right, maybe waiting a week for the light to be right, then developing it correctly, and using the right filter in the enlarger etc. I could go on forever. So let someone go to the exact same spot and attempt to take the exact same photo... it wont happen. They might be able to take a photo of the same thing, but it will not be THE same photo. What made Adam's work so great was how every detail and every aspect of the photo and shot that could be controlled by the artist was controlled so masterfully.Kdh12 wrote:My point was not that Adams was not original, we was a head of his time considering we was working in the 40's and 50's when camera/film technology sucked money balls...AceO wrote:Kdh12 wrote:I hesitate to get in this debate cuz it happens every month or so..... but
1- Fairey was mad at people flipping poster not cuz they are reselling his art and making money off it but because many TRUE fans do not get the posters are having to pay the flippers
2- Many of images that Fairey uses, yes they are other people's images to start, but they are very vernacular portraits of iconic figures... for example the Mao portrait that keeps coming up.... how many hundreds of images do you think there are that look just like that....
He could use his imagination and draw them but that is not his art, he is an illustrator that uses a lot of mixed media in his fine art..... ask Ansal Adams to draw a landscape.....
How bout Shep creates some "art" without stealing someone elses image???? Maybe Ansal Adams could just take another artists landscape and put his name on it like Shep?
but asking Fairey to draw instead of illustrating might be like asking Adams to paint.... it was not his thing....
that said, how many times do you think that someone has taken the same exact photo as Adams.. does that mean they are stealing?
There was one artist in particular (can't think of his name right now) who went around and took the same exact photos as Adams plus 50 yeas as a way to show human impression on the land..... is he stealing? He could have made his same points without taking the same photos as Adams?
This argument of Fairey stealing other people's images is not fair, and IMO there are no new ideas in art AT ALL... only old ideas reworked and retought up........
Furthermore, someone is not stealing an idea or a "landscape" by taking a photo of a natural structure or scene that has already been photographed. It's beauty already exists to those who see it. There is a huge difference with an artist that is a painter, or an illustrator if they are creating a piece of art focusing on a fictitious image (they are not painting or drawing still-life, but instead using their imagination to create their art). In this situation, the artist is creating the art from his/her own experience and thoughts (although they may certainly be influenced by art they have seen before). Then, once the piece is finished, what makes it great or not is the artist's technique, or the unique way in which they executed the image, or the message that is embedded or given-off by the image. There are obviously hundreds if not thousands of criteria here. But if someone where to take this original art and then reproduce it (or parts of it), copying the original technique, and incorporating the already associated poignancy of the original work into their own piece of art, well then it IS copying. (In today's day and age, one does not even need to copy the technique used by the original artist to recreate the original work, its as simple as just finding a digital copy of the piece of art and cutting and pasting the pieces of it that you want to use). It seems to me that Fairey has done this. This is easily seen in one of the many examples shown in Vallen's article (http://www.art-for-a-change.com/Obey/index.htm ). The example I chose to use is Chaplin’s One Big Union image, where all Fairey did was copy the original image and add a lightening bolt to the already drawn hand. Then Fairey put this image with the text "Obey Propaganda" on a shirt and now sells it and profits off of it. Fairey did NOTHING "artistic" with the original image what-so-ever. Nothing. And none of you can argue differently. He added some flame-like border above the throng of people, that was it. This is NOT being an artist. Now I am not saying that Fairey has not done other things that ARE artistic, but this is a prime example of his direct stealing of someone else's art and creativity. This was not a landscape that Fairey copied, this was not a still-life that Fairey copied, this was an original piece of art that was formed from the creative process of the original artist. This is VERY different than if Ansel Adams took a photo of a landscape that someone else had already taken a famous photo of. Actually, I would probably enjoy seeing Adams take a photo of an already famous landscape to see what would be done differently, and to see what different things were highlighted or focused on, or to see if a different time of day or light pattern was used. Copying is the highest form a flattery, right? In this case, it would be, if Adams was so moved by a particular landscape someone else did that Adams wanted to try and do a similar one. But Adams would not be taking a photo of the original photo and then calling it his own! Adams would be using his own artistic abilities to try and create beauty from an already discovered source. This is so incredibly different than just taking a drawing or painting that has already been made and altering it ever so slightly and then NOT crediting the original source and selling it as your own creation. Ok, I could go on forever, and I never thought I would even write this, and I did. But I just think that it is impossible to excuse Fairey of the blatant theft of certain images that he uses.
