[normhead]

You know I have often wondered about this kind of thing. I go to Niagara Falls, I'm standing beside some dude, he takes a picture. I take the sam picture. He sells his picture, I think "hey, that's my picture." I know the OP thinks he's the only one who stood in that spot and took that picture, but, it's quite possible he wasn't. I'm not going all in thinking this picture was his.

There's guy near here selling an image of a wolf that is almost an exact copy of one of my images I know because we were shoulder to shoulder taking the images...both of us squeezed into the same 6 sq. feet of soil. I don't think either of us can claim rights to any image than the one taken by our own cameras. The first thing you would have to do would be prove the other photographer didn't take it, because if she did you didn't. And you have no case if you can't prove she doesn't have the same image. Given that your image is a film image, that is going to be really tough.

---

Last edited by normhead; 11-01-2016 at 08:37 AM.

[Ontarian50]

With exactly the same parallax view on a per pixel basis? Unlikely to the point of being impossible, even for shoulder to shoulder shots, especially when you consider further factors like differences in lens width, sensor size, etc. There will always be subtle but noticeable differences.

The exactly overlaying negatives are dispositive. It's a rip.

Yes, I don't think there's really any question that's the OP's image being used. If you consider stereo photography, you only need a few centimeters distance between the lenses to create two distinctly different images for the 3D effect. And there's that horizon tilt - pretty hard for two side-by-side photographers to do it exactly the same.

[aT0Mx]

With exactly the same parallax view on a per pixel basis? Unlikely to the point of being impossible, even for shoulder to shoulder shots, especially when you consider further factors like differences in lens width, sensor size, etc. There will always be subtle but noticeable differences.

The exactly overlaying negatives are dispositive. It's a rip.



---------- Post added 11-01-16 at 09:49 AM ----------

BTW, here is what appears to be Jill St. Marseille's Linkedin profile. She works for the Public Affairs directorate of the RCAF.

https://ca.linkedin.com/in/jill-st-marseille-5559bbb7

You might want to give her a polite talking to regarding proper crediting, and CC in her commanding officer/manager while you are at it.

I am writing an email to send to the PAFFO.

[BrianR]

Yes, I don't think there's really any question that's the OP's image being used. If you consider stereo photography, you only need a few centimeters distance between the lenses to create two distinctly different images for the 3D effect. And there's that horizon tilt - pretty hard for two side-by-side photographers to do it exactly the same.

And the location - it doesn't exactly look like there'd be one natural position to stand and shoot from. Plus the sun would have to be in the same position. Pretty tough for everything to randomly line up down to the pixel. I guess he may not have noticed someone swooping in right after him to take a photograph from the exact piece of prime real estate he had, especially given the large crowd of photographers that tend to roam around that far north. Even then, I'd doubt we'd even be close to lottery ticket odds for such a match.

It would be an interesting project to search through hundreds of thousands of images of some iconic subject looking for the closest matches.

[normhead]

And the location - it doesn't exactly look like there'd be one natural position to stand and shoot from. Plus the sun would have to be in the same position. Pretty tough for everything to randomly line up down to the pixel. I guess he may not have noticed someone swooping in right after him to take a photograph from the exact piece of prime real estate he had, especially given the large crowd of photographers that tend to roam around that far north. Even then, I'd doubt we'd even be close to lottery ticket odds for such a match.

It would be an interesting project to search through hundreds of thousands of images of some iconic subject looking for the closest matches.

Sounds like a job for someone's computer. But the whole thing reminds me of a guiding trip a few years ago. I took a client in to one of Ontario's prettiest waterfalls, made famous in a Tom Thompson painting, got him to the best location, we climbed to the top of a 40 x 40 foot 7 foot high table rock the middle of the stream giving near perfect frontal access, he said "Where should I stand?" Apparently the last trip he took into Yosemite, the "photographer guide" took them to the exact spot Ansel Adams took one of his famous images and every one in the group took a few images from the same spot. Personally, I will take you to the place, but figuring out where you should stand is a little more of a service than I offer.

I'm not sure if I even believe in that. Part of learning to be a photographer is figuring out where to stand. After all, I'm shooting too. If they want to be copycats, they can just go everywhere I go, after I leave... but I digress.

Has anyone superimposed one on top of the other to make sure they are an exact match. Another issue, does Facebook have the right to sell your images? Given the liberal nature of the terms of use for posters, I'm not actually clear that they can't just take any face book image and sell it. I'm not sure that they can't just use the whole of Facebook like a an image agency. After all, I don't pay them, how else would they make money from my stuff?

[Alex645]

Sounds like a job for someone's computer. But the whole thing reminds me of a guiding trip a few years ago. I took a client in to one of Ontario's prettiest waterfalls, made famous in a Tom Thompson painting, got him to the best location, we climbed to the top of a 40 x 40 foot 7 foot high table rock the middle of the stream giving near perfect frontal access, he said "Where should I stand?" Apparently the last trip he took into Yosemite, the "photographer guide" took them to the exact spot Ansel Adams took one of his famous images and every one in the group took a few images from the same spot.

Great story....and rather telling how we are so programmed at school for the one correct answer instead of being creative and finding that there are multiple solutions.

Michael (the OP) in his initial post put what I would consider convincing evidence that the two shots are the same. My only question for him....what was the circumstance of where and when this was shot and were you alone? It would be interesting to compare metadata.

[BrianR]

Sounds like a job for someone's computer. But the whole thing reminds me of a guiding trip a few years ago. I took a client in to one of Ontario's prettiest waterfalls, made famous in a Tom Thompson painting, got him to the best location, we climbed to the top of a 40 x 40 foot 7 foot high table rock the middle of the stream giving near perfect frontal access, he said "Where should I stand?"

There is a couple that have made this a life's work, tracking when Tom Thompson went and attempting to photograph matches to where his paintings were made. Their goal isn't to replicate his images, but to fill in the history of where he traveled, and they have some pretty cool stories as a result. I can't recall their names right now, but if you're interested I could probably dig them up.

Apparently the last trip he took into Yosemite, the "photographer guide" took them to the exact spot Ansel Adams took one of his famous images and every one in the group took a few images from the same spot. Personally, I will take you to the place, but figuring out where you should stand is a little more of a service than I offer.

I recall a few years back the sun or the moon (maybe both?) aligned to how they appeared in one of Adams famous photos. Many people made the 'pilgrimage" to the site to replicate his photo. Much controversy and bashing resulted. I have to think there would have been a fun communal element to viewing the exact same alignment in an iconic photo you held dear along with like minded people. I agree on one level it's "what's the point", but there can certainly be an interesting component to following in someone's footsteps. If all you want is your own copied version, then yea, I don't get that. But different strokes.

Has anyone superimposed one on top of the other to make sure they are an exact match.

If you mean the OP's image, yes, he did in the first post. Minor overall global tonal differences, but that would have been easy to go awry in a resaving.

[aT0Mx]

There is a couple that have made this a life's work, tracking when Tom Thompson went and attempting to photograph matches to where his paintings were made. Their goal isn't to replicate his images, but to fill in the history of where he traveled, and they have some pretty cool stories as a result. I can't recall their names right now, but if you're interested I could probably dig them up.



I recall a few years back the sun or the moon (maybe both?) aligned to how they appeared in one of Adams famous photos. Many people made the 'pilgrimage" to the site to replicate his photo. Much controversy and bashing resulted. I have to think there would have been a fun communal element to viewing the exact same alignment in an iconic photo you held dear along with like minded people. I agree on one level it's "what's the point", but there can certainly be an interesting component to following in someone's footsteps. If all you want is your own copied version, then yea, I don't get that. But different strokes.



If you mean the OP's image, yes, he did in the first post. Minor overall global tonal differences, but that would have been easy to go awry in a resaving.

I could tell that the contrast and brightness had been adjusted along with a crop. But the tit wasn't corrected.

[leekil]

You know I have often wondered about this kind of thing. I go to Niagara Falls, I'm standing beside some dude, he takes a picture. I take the sam picture. He sells his picture, I think "hey, that's my picture." I know the OP thinks he's the only one who stood in that spot and took that picture, but, it's quite possible he wasn't. I'm not going all in thinking this picture was his.

There's guy near here selling an image of a wolf that is almost an exact copy of one of my images I know because we were shoulder to shoulder taking the images...both of us squeezed into the same 6 sq. feet of soil. I don't think either of us can claim rights to any image than the one taken by our own cameras. The first thing you would have to do would be prove the other photographer didn't take it, because if she did you didn't. And you have no case if you can't prove she doesn't have the same image. Given that your image is a film image, that is going to be really tough.

Here's a case where that same thing happened:

Contest Copyright Controversy a Crazy Coincidence

[Alex645]

Here's a case where that same thing happened:

Contest Copyright Controversy a Crazy Coincidence

Interesting story. Without having been to where the OP took his shot and who was around at the moment in time, can the OP explain the circumstances of the shot? Was he alone? Were there restrictions that would force others to take the shot from the same place? Or at the same time?

[normhead]

After taking the two images into Pixelmator, resizing and overlaying, they appear to be the exact same image. Sometimes I just have to do these things myself before I'm convinced.