I won’t lie, I’ve gotten fairly emotional about this situation, and I regret my hasty, relatively immature post before this. I’m still fairly emotional, but Janey raises some interesting points. She’s a faster typer than I am, so this post is coming out after she said she would drop it, but after this is posted, I too will drop it. I think we’ve agreed to disagree, but I would like to express my point of view, just as she had a chance to express hers.
After my comment on her blog, Janey posted this response:
"I've been using photos I've found on line in Flickr and on websites for inspiration for many of my drawings. Is that "copying"? Is it an infringement of copyright? I've thought about this [a lot]. I've had several of my drawings copied and used on websites and blogs without my permission and that's wrong. I've had my drawings manipulated and changed and that's wrong. Other people have used my work for inspiration and drawn them "ala [Janey]". And that's ok by me and actually I find it very, very flattering.
I think that all artists copy from other artists at some point usually early in their development. It's a way of learning. The intent is not to duplicate the original. My drawings are anything but realistic. I have no interest in it or talent really for making the drawing look like the photo. I'm using the poses as inspiration. And each drawing is linked to the original. The photos I've used as inspiration belong to very talented artists. Their work as influenced me immensely. Samantha Wolov is one of those artists."
I'm in no position to comment how an artist should learn their craft; it's completely subjective. Yes, artists do learn from other artists. I can’t begin to imagine how much research I did trying to educate myself as to what had been done already, and how it had been done. But that’s precisely the point--I wanted to see what already existed to I could shape my own ideas and technique; I did it so I could be different. I never tried to recreate a scene someone else had captured. I do not think that simply copying another artist’s work is, in any way, a form of education. All Janey has proven is that she is skilled with markers/watercolors (I can’t tell which). The vision, perspective, content, and feeling in those images are not hers, they’re mine, and I’m highly offended that there is even a question over that.
If you look at Janey’s drawings, and you look at my original photographs, there is a clear connection between the two. I think my work was outright copied, plain and simple. Janey obviously thinks differently.
I’m not angry, or at least not as much as some might be in this situation. I do understand where Janey is coming from. Yes, we all need to start somewhere, and I commend her for attempting to teach herself. But there are so many other methods she could use. She could sign up for a one-day nude photography workshop just to take some snapshots. She could take self-portraits. She could ask friends (that’s all I did). If she is going to “translate” a photograph into her own drawing style anyway, then she doesn’t need a perfect photograph. But it should be HER photograph.
Would I like the pictures removed from the site? Yes. Would I like the originals? Yes. Am I sorry this had to happen? Yes. But legally, what does this mean? If she “copied” my original photos, which are protected by a copyright, but they’ve been translated by her hands into being “original works” in themselves, are they also protected? What does this mean for artists like Sherrie Levine? I don’t think there’s a connection between Janey and Levine, as I suspect Levine’s work was social commentary and process-based, rather than Janey’s product-based work, but Levine is still highly relevant here. Is developing one’s own artistic or creative identity from another artist “copying?” Do all artists inadvertently copy each other? Does originality still exist?
I’m not upset with Janey, and I would certainly hope that this situation doesn’t balloon into something more than two artists with a disagreement. But I need to balance feeling highly violated and trying to objectively look at the work of another emerging artist, an individual to whom I should be somewhat sympathetic.
If you have an opinion about the theory of originality and artistic education, I’d love to hear it. But I’m not interested in hearing about who is “right” or “wrong”, and I will promptly delete any comment that says so.
