[Larrymc]

Award-Winning Photographer Lisa Saad Accused of Stealing Photos

That's so Saad.

[clackers]

Yes but those are all photos that could exist in reality had the photographer or advertiser the time or luck with weather etc.. Cheating slightly to make deadlines or glossy adverts look good is one thing, this is on a different level.
But either way by the sounds of it she has broken the rules of a fair few of those competitions.

Yeah, I love Conceptual Photography, and it's always been around, but Lisa really has to accept responsibility here. She might pop up and say she hired a digital artist off the Net and he incorporated someone else's pictures, but that's an unprofessional attitude. Your name on the work, your reputation!


Here's a Phillippe Halsman from 1936 (that's Dali in it):




and here are some contemporary examples I like:

Credit:Jonni



Credit: Michelle Joyce



Credit: HiVerbalFan

[PJ1]

Here's a Phillippe Halsman from 1936

I can just imagine telling the cats "Hang on. we have to do that again."

[clackers]

I can just imagine telling the cats "Hang on. we have to do that again."

Yeah, I was on a workshop where the organizer, a model, was telling me of a nightmare hour spent posing for a shot where she had to hit a cricket ball. Dull take after take after take because the ball positioning with respect to the rest of the frame had to be right along with her forced smile, extension of limbs, etc. She was being paid for the hour, but clearly thought the ball should have been Photoshopped in from the start.

[swanlefitte]

Always has been. "When Rejlander applied to have the picture exhibited at the Photographic Society of Scotland, it was rejected. The judges didn’t consider the picture a true photograph, because it was a modified image, not “as seen by the camera”"
Lens Rentals | Blog

[clackers]

Always has been. "When Rejlander applied to have the picture exhibited at the Photographic Society of Scotland, it was rejected. The judges didn’t consider the picture a true photograph, because it was a modified image, not “as seen by the camera”"

Lens Rentals | Blog

Yeah, super interesting article - thanks for the link!

Photojournalists are still hardcore about this - so much so that after Steve 'Afghan Girl' McCurry was caught using Photoshop, he's had to renounce calling himself one.

[cmohr]

It's really strange behavior from such a noted Photographer. It wasn't like, this was her "big break" , as,she is already quite a renowned Photographer and Digital Artist, Highly regarded in the industry. This ran into breaking the rules. All images must be taken yourself. regardless of any manipulation. And when the photographer whose work it was challenged the picture, she actually attacked him with treats . That's Not good.

The ideas and rules in the competition are clear and simple. The cascade effect on the whole thing, is massive. Her entire portfolio , has been disqualified, she should not have been in the running, Someone else , should have had the recognition, the prize money , endorsements ect. Others who were eliminated , should have been in the running, She has had the benefit of the title , and won work from it along the way, others, who may have profited by it, never got the chance.

This isn't a little bit of "Fair Use" there is no Fair use in this case. It's quite strange that she did it. I mean, she knew the rules, and she knew here work, some, may say, it was a simple oversight, that she had the image in her portfolio, but, again, an artist knows their work, so when curating her portfolio for entry, surely would have known the image was outside the contest rules. I don't know?

Also, It's a bit hard to believe, the works were not authenticated by the Competition, especially, at the time she was shortlisted into the finals. Surely at that stage of judging, a more rigorous process should have been used to make sure the portfolio met the guidelines???

It's a bit of a mess for ALL involved.

.

[clackers]

Also, It's a bit hard to believe, the works were not authenticated by the Competition, especially, at the time she was shortlisted into the finals. Surely at that stage of judging, a more rigorous process should have been used to make sure the portfolio met the guidelines???
.

It's largely a trust system, Chris, as are many things in life, from competitions to university essays to corporate insider trading, and it takes a 'whistleblower' to expose the fraud.

If you were one of the judges, chosen because you're a very good photographer, how could you testify as to how genuine any of the pieces submitted to you were?

[stevebrot]

I can just imagine telling the cats "Hang on. we have to do that again."

It was done in multiple (28) takes...same cats. Google "Dali Atomicus"...

http://time.com/4429888/dali-atomicus/



Steve

[officiousbystander]

Here's the rationale behind photographic appropriation. No doubt Richard Prince has already been discussed here in other threads.

You Tube

You Tube

[Rondec]

Here's the rationale behind photographic appropriation. No doubt Richard Prince has already been discussed here in other threads.
Untitled (Cowboy): Behind Richard Prince's Photographs & Appropriation | 100 Photos | TIME - YouTube

Sure.

I didn't particularly think that Richard Prince's Instagram series was "art," but clearly some people did. But I didn't think Andy Warhol's paintings were all that great either.

But as I said before the issue is not really the appropriation, but the admission that you are taking elements from others. This artist has claimed that she photographed all of the things in her images herself. If she was honest and said that she took images from these other people and manipulated them and then used them in her own image, she would have been disqualified from this contest, but she still could have sold her pieces as art and not had to worry about the truth coming out.

[Digitalis]

I'll say this has been a hot topic in my workplace, my take is she should have entered a different category and stayed out of photography, she should have admitted to the use of appropriated materials...and credited the sources appropriately.

Have I ever made use of appropriated material in my personal work? not intentionally, there might be some errant signage or commercial product shown in my images. Having said that: I would never made any claim to having produced it.

[ffking]

The strange thing to me is that none of the externally sourced elements shown would be that difficult to generate yourself (with the possible exception of the architecture, depending on where it is) - it does seem to be a mindset thing of seeing nothing wrong with it rather than a dtermined plagiarism thing.

[BrianR]

The Bonsai tree on the stylized heart is my favourite. It's pretty convincingly that other chaps photo from flickr (which he has freely allowed the use of in many illustrations), but it comes with the heartwarming backstory of it belonging to Saad's mother. That shows the extra level of commitment beyond just silently appropriating and taking credit for the work of others.

[stevebrot]

A broader question is the matter of appropriation in general. For example, photographers regularly appropriate sculpture, architecture, and landscape design as elements of composition and as props. The difference between that and copying another's photo is that the usual (and most often correct) assumption is that the photographer did not make both the photo and the statue.


Steve