Yesterday, I found that a large Sydney university had published an image of mine on their website. As I did not recall selling them the image directly, I emailed them asking them how they obtained the image as it could be that one of my stock libraries was yet to advise me of the sale. Imagine my surprise when I received an email from them advising that "It was used inadvertently by the previous Administrator. We request your understanding in this instance as it was not deliberately done". I sent them an account for 12 months website usage when they advised me that they had removed the image and had no further use for it. They did not appear to understand that they had infringed my copyright. What I found astonishing was the comment that it was done "inadvertently" and "not deliberately done". So how did the image get their without anyone actually going to some trouble to remove it from my site and place it on their website? How can this act be inadvertent? I advised them that they were getting off lightly as I was only charging them for the use of the image and not punitive damages, which is what I would be entitled to in a court. As it appeared that they were not going to pay my account ($250), I suggested that they send it to their legal department. Their response was that this was being done. Years ago, I worked for an intellectual property lawyer in Toronto, Canada so am very familiar with copyright laws. Also, having worked for a large Sydney law firm for the past 20 years, also helps!
Doesn't anyone understand copyright infringement these days?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After Topaz
Using Topaz Spicify, the image has been enhanced in both colour and "pop". This may be a tad OTT but when printed out, it looks rather good (even if I say so myself!!).
Elderly gents
Image enhancing filters
I have recently been experimenting with different filters for post processing images. Topaz has been one of them. Using the adjust filter, one can change rather dramatically an image which may (or may not) need enhancing. Purists argue that one should not enhance or change an image but in this era, we are bombarded with enhanced movies so it seems a natural progression to enhance still images. The pic directly above is the original image (shot RAW and converted using Adobe Camera RAW).
Rather boring shot of Sydney Harbour
I am going to show how a somewhat boring shot of Sydney Harbour (if there ever could be one!) can be turned into something a little more spectacular. Below is the original shot (shot in RAW format with my Canon 5D) and taken off the back of the Manly ferry.
Sydney Harbour
Rather boring shot of Sydney Harbour
Conversion
Using Adobe Camera Raw ("ACR"), I converted the raw image with parameters: Blacks 7, brightness +31, Contrast +61, Clarity +77, Vibrance +7, Saturation 72 and a bit of Curves which brought me to the below image.
Harbour
Flood filter conversion
I then produced a "reflection" using Flaming Pear flood filter. For those unfamiliar with this filter, it gives the image a perception of a reflection (poetical!) and I see it often in publications and I find myself examining ALL images with reflections to see if the photographer had used this very handy filter. I have details of the conversion if anyone is interested but to post it would be a tad boring. Flaming pair flood filters can be found here
Reflection
Sydney Harbour reflection using flood filter
Sea of Hats
I was on my lunch hour when I was strolling around The Rocks area of Sydney when I saw a group of private schoolgirls on an excursion. As soon as I saw their hats, I knew that there was a good opportunity to get a good snap. As luck would have it, they started to cross the street to where I was standing. I knew in my head the image I was looking for and I had to be above them. With an enormous amount of good fortune, a ramp up to a shop in this old area of Sydney was a few metres away. I raced up the ramp and shot this image. It was taken with my Canon 70-200 f/4L at f/5.6 which gave me a shallow depth of field leaving the centre hat in sharp focus and the rest of the hats out of focus. I submitted this image in late 2005 to the Black and White Spider Awards and it won Outstanding Achievement - People and also won me the Photographer of the Year 2005 - amateur. It really is nice to get recognition of one's work and even though I am now a professional, it still gives me a warm feeling when I look at my certificate!
Sulphur crested cockatoo in flight
This is an image on which I have added a "flood" filter. It is quite effective and quite a nice shot in any event. Flood filters can be found here and they are worth every cent. There is always a debate regarding "Photoshopping" images but as long as one is honest about the origin and digital changes to the image, I think its legimate. The original image, taken in our garden, of the cockatoo actually landing on the lawn, had a piece of its left hand side wing missing so I "replaced" it in Photoshop CS4. Cockatoos actually dislike water and when they start attacking the timber balustrades on our verandah, all I have to do is get out the spray bottle and walk towards them. They are endearing creatures, very intelligent but are enormously destructive. They are very long lived (up to 80 years) so don't even think of buying one unless you plan to outlive it and put up with the high decibels of squawking! I really hate seeing them in cages and they must long to be free when they see a large flock passing by.
Surfing the storm
Late one afternoon, I was snapping at Avalon Beach, Sydney, when a storm approached. This did not stop a late surfer. This image is available as a print via my RedBubble site. Click on image which will take you to the print site.
Sydney Opera House abstract
An abstract look at the famous icon. It is very difficult to take any pics of the Opera House as everyone and their brother has done it before. For this particular image, I used Optikvervlabs filter.
Leopard seal
I took this shot of a leopard seal exhaling bubbles at Taronga Zoo in Sydney. This is, apparently, one of the few leopard seals in captivity. Apparently it was found injured awhile back and is happy in its huge enclosure at the Zoo along with its mate. Through a stock library, this image is to appear as a full page in a textbook.
Alice
A portrait of an elderly lady
This is one of my favourite images of Alice, an elderly aboriginal lady who sadly is now deceased. I would occasionally see her at Circular Quay in Sydney and she would often smile at me. I used a Dragan filter to bring out more texture to the image. I am often asked if I have ever been challenged when photographing candid subjects. Only on one occasion, I was asked not to take a photograph of a female street performer which was odd as that is where they often make their money. So, of course, I acceded to her wishes. Many buskers or street performers expect payment for taking their photograph and its something I always do as its their living, as taking photographs is mine. One of my most popular galleries on my website is one of Sydney Aborigines and I have many kind comments on my work. I did have one person, a Sydney academic, who actually called me a thief as she was under the erroneous impression that I was selling images of these colourful folk without payment which in fact is not true. I have model releases from many and I have made subsequent payments to them.
The smoker
An elderly man puffs on a cigarette
Mudda Mudda
My favourite subject
Mudda Mudda (aka Cedric) is an aboriginal busker who is often found at Circular Quay, in Sydney, accompanying other aboriginal buskers. He has such a great face and this image won me a UK award last year for traditional portraiture here
Sheila, Unless the law has been changed recently, I think you'll find the punitive damages is not an option available to you under Australian copyright law.
ReplyDeleteYes, Rob, you are correct. Much to my dismay (!), I received advice from an ex-work colleague (who specialised in intellectual property law) that I could not obtain punitive or exemplary damages for breach of copyright and also there is only a low probability that I would get flagrancy damages as most courts would not regard what happened as corporately flagrant. That said, they have agreed to pay my account! There would not appear to be any recourse for Australian photographers to recover damages and thereby no deterrent for those wishing to publish images without the photographer's consent.
ReplyDeleteSheile, I remembered this from an object lesson in Australian copyright litigation when about 20 years agom with a group of photographers and writers we pursued a publisher who owed us collectively, $64,000...taking the case to the High Court. It's a long story, but the essence was that after losing our suit to prevent publication because we had not been paid (we had contracts which said, "payment on acceptance")and incurring legal fees of $22,000, our barrister asked if we wanted to appeal. While he gave us every reason to think we would win, it appeared it would cost us another $16,000 and that all we would get was the amount we were owed (plus costs). At that point we decided to cut our losses and abandon the fight. It is the sad truth that without punitive damages there's little incentive to fight copyright issues in the courts in Australia.
ReplyDelete