PDA

View Full Version : Art world in a flap as it takes stock of contentious images



norwest
01-09-2012, 2:34pm
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/art-world-in-a-flap-as-it-takes-stock-of-contentious-images-20120831-255nj.html

Kym
01-09-2012, 2:52pm
Meh! © infringement - he deserves what he gets

Steve Axford
01-09-2012, 3:15pm
It's interesting the arguments used to support him, like ''He's always working on the surfaces of his images, he sandwiches negatives together, he does all sorts of unusual stuff and makes them into very poetic, artistic images." Yet he submits images to Obscura that have other people metadata on them. I know of some people who seem to resent acknowledging that others have made a significant contribution to their work.

arthurking83
01-09-2012, 4:32pm
If he has legally obtained a license to use the images then go ahead .. but to initially deny they're just ripoffs .. LOL!

"He's always working on the surface" .. is that leet speak for " he applies various ripped off actions" and then saves the image as his own ....

idiot doesn't even know how to remove metadata! .. artist :rolleyes:

Now the world knows what kind of 'artist' ;) he really is! :p

Kym
01-09-2012, 5:33pm
His problem is that he has blown all credibility -- no one will be interested -- may as well get a job a Macca's coz any further in art is gone

Mark L
01-09-2012, 8:48pm
His problem is that he has blown all credibility -- .....
There were people defending him in the article.
Not sure why either, but they were.:scrtch:

Mark L
03-09-2012, 8:00pm
And the result ...... http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/gallery-dumps-artist-over-photo-controversy-20120902-258m4.html

Kym
07-09-2012, 9:24am
And the result ...... http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/gallery-dumps-artist-over-photo-controversy-20120902-258m4.html

The Gallery did the right thing and this is telling...

Matt Hansen, the US photographer who took the original eagle image used in Ong's 1000 Years Beside Myself #1, said he thought the use was ''extremely unethical'' and was inquiring with Getty about its legality.

A buyer of Ong's sold-out raven image, Jacky Wilkes, said she believed it was an original photograph that he had taken. ''Had I known that the artwork was based on a stock image, I would never have purchased the artwork … I was misled by the artist.''

Analog6
07-09-2012, 11:36am
I posted about this on FB at the time. To me, it is not so much the buying other's images as the lying about it, right up until the metadata 'outed' him. I'm not fond of this type of art anyway, but this guy is obviously just a parasite.

ricktas
07-09-2012, 11:51am
For me, the biggest issue was that he outright lied when initially asked about the images.


Ong, 30, told the Herald he took those photos himself and that claims he did not were false and "heartbreaking''.


Once he realised he had really been caught out, he changed his story. But for me, the fact he initially lied about the images tells me a lot about his character, and his intent to deceive.

Rattus79
07-09-2012, 1:46pm
Throw the book at him.

The industry needs to have a scape goat in general to help make sure that this kind of thing does not become prevelant within the industry at large.

Personally, I think it's disgusting!

Mark L
07-09-2012, 9:43pm
Not that I'm necessarily swayed this way, but there's always a right of reply and another side to a story.
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/artist-says-stock-photos-not-meant-to-mislead-20120903-25ana.html
and http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/its-popular-but-a-remix-can-be-seen-as-a-racket-20120903-25adb.html

Analog6
08-09-2012, 8:34am
No matter how many sides to this if you don't say it is your interpretation of another's work it is (a) theft and (b) fraud - ie obtaining money by false pretences.