Sunday, September 27, 2009
Who's Art is it Anyway?
I am a great believer in copyright, but sometimes things get fuzzy, especially when it comes to photography and the use of photo reference. It's not a problem for me, most of the time, as I use my own photo's & imagination, with exceptions of looking up anatomical details, proportions and other factual matter.
I've been on two weeks holidays, and I took a lot of pictures (300+), most of them purely awful photographs, but potentially useful as reference. Since I don't paint in any kind of photo-real mode, I don't require a bang up awesome photo to start with, just something to jog the memory and give me the basic facts but it's a load of boring repetive trees, rocks, and waves to slog through.
One of the potential paintings (I have enough ideas to keep me going for months) is a 'standing stone' (not shown). I've actually wanted to do a series of stones in their environment, but this one certainly didn't arrive in it's position naturally; when I do a painting, based on my photograph, who's art will it be?
Here's another one. And nope, no painting planned for this one. In this case, the 'art' is obvious. If you want to see it, you need to walk the Chickanishing Trail in Killarney Provincial Park. It's at the furthest point on the trail, and you need to walk the shore at the wave-line to see it (look backwards). I'm not sure if the 'leaf' will last the winter as it's peeling. Unlike graffiti, which I find jarring, I found this surprise to be quite beautiful, and enhancing. It is in harmony with the surroundings. In this case, I simply would not do a painting as this is a work of art.
On the other hand, in the case of the standing stone, I consider an unfinished inukshuk to be fair game to the artists eye.
Nothing is ever quite black and white.
If anyone knows the artist to be given credit to this maple leaf, I will gladly do so. Thanks 'anonymous' for a spot of beauty & insight on the rocks.