Plagarism in Photography

Elgol - an uncomfortable view
Originally uploaded by thefatcat44

I feel very uncomfortable with posting this image. I felt uncomfortable making it.


This is because I knew it is very similar to (but not nearly as good as) Joe Cornish's iconic image from the same location that graces the front cover of his superb book 'First Light'. Even the light, colour and tones are not disimilar to Joes. You can see a Joes image here on his website - www.joecornish.com/products/view_product.asp?catid=408&am...


It feels like plagarism.


So should I have taken it? Should I have posted it? Should I sell it?


I went to the location like just about every other photographer who goes to Skye, because it is such a stunning place. The Cullins are actually much closer to the shore here than most images indicate. Our use of wide angle lenses pushes the mountains into the distance in the image. It was this that struck me most when I first came round the hairpin bend into the small fishing village. The Cullins loom up and dominate the senses.


The 'beach' is boulder strewn in front of low cliffs. At dusk, if the weather blesses you, the Cullin look superb, ominous, splendid. All lenses point towards them in an effort to catch the mood.


Many who go there are thwarted by cloud and rain cloaking the hills, coming away with nothing. Yet the place is so powerful we return again and again in an effort to capture the view.


You will often find a gaggle (or should that be 'a click'?) of photographers all bent on the same mission. On this visit of mine there was at least ten photographers scattered along the foreshore.


So here it was I set up my tripod. As soon as I saw the small layered cliff and the beautiful lichen covered spherical boulder I knew I was standing where Joe did. I understood straight away why he had composed the image as he did and could do no more than make a similar image myself.


Now this bothers me. That my 'take' on the scene was so similar to his. I tried other compositions, some better than others, but this is the one I favored. I do have three or four other images made on the same evening but none I like as much as this one. I think Joe got it dead right, but I would much rather have found something of my own.


So my dilemma is this. Should I have made the image? If I made it (as I did), should I have kept it for my own viewing only or is it okay to display it here and on my own website? Would it be right to offer it for sale to my customers? Is it plagarism?


I once did plagarise an image on purpose. I had seen Pete Bridgewoods image of an old factory in Hull and adored it. I was up in the area and just had to have a go myself. I set out to stand where he stood and then try to process the image as he did - it is a heavily processed image. This was done to learn technique, and because it was an image I love. I let Pete know about it, sent him a copy and it is on my website and here on Flickr. Pete was okay with me selling it, but I am not. It is an almost identical copy of his and while I love it and am pleased to have made it, I will not sell it.


This image is different. I went there, not because of Joe, but because of the place. I didn't set out to get an image so close to Joes. In fact, I was hoping for more stormy, ominous weather with more dramatic lighting to be honest.


I have stood at the side of the River Coupall at the foot of the mighty Stob Dearg and tried to capture the wonderful shape of that mountain with the river and tree in the foreground. So have countless others. We all, well nearly all, go there because it is such a magnificent view and many of us display and sell the results of our trip. It has become a cliched image but why do I not worry about selling my images of it?


I think it is because that while the view is iconic, I have no idea who made the view famous. Who first set up their tripod there, who discovered it? I have no idea and so it doesn't make me feel uncomfortable.


How do you feel about this? Should we view the landscape as ours, 'unplagarisable'? The clouds are never the same, the light is always unique, the waves change - any image, while it can be similar will never be identical in the way text lifted from one writers work and dropped into a students homework is. It is not a copy and paste excercise.


Or, once a particular composition has been captured and made famous by a photographer does that put it off limits as a commercial composition for the rest of us? Should we respect their skill and art, perhaps make a private image for ourselves, but for ourselves only?


How many will be heading up to the Old Man of Storr now the winning image of the Landscape Photographer of the Year 2009 has been announced? How many will try and make a panorama from the same viewpoint. (I climbed up there last week in the dark and have come back with some images I am reasonable happy with. Just hours later at a cafe, the owner gave me my first glimpse of the winning image in the local Skye paper - I am relieved to say the composition is totally different to mine and yet while I was up there I saw a photographer moving his tripod around from the very area where the winning shot had been taken. Coincidence? Or, had he seen the image and was now trying to recreate it? I have no idea. Whatever, I just hope his horizon is straighter! :) ).


I would really appreciate your thoughts on my issues here. I haven't made up my mind and could do with some wise guidance.