Lisa Saad, Melbourne Photographer (AIPP runner up) : Oops

[ricktas]

Things could get messy for this Melbourne Photographer in coming days.

http://stopstealingphotos.com/lisa-saad-photographer-melbourne-australia/

[ricktas]

Interesting reading the update at the bottom of that link, where the person behind to blog is being asked to remove it, post an apology and pay. However it seems when they have asked for a copy of the RAW file to prove that the image is not stolen... they are being ignored.

I think we might see more about this one in coming days and weeks.

[ricktas]

More discussion going on about it here: https://www.facebook.com/photostealers/

[enseth]

Based on what I've read in Rick's links I'm surprised anyone would be so blatantly as to enter such a prestigious competition using someone else's work. :rolleyes:

[ricktas]

Based on what I've read in Rick's links I'm surprised anyone would be so blatantly as to enter such a prestigious competition using someone else's work. :rolleyes:

Certainly. The fact that Marcel (the other photographer) presented his RAW files, and even though the same has been requested of Lisa Saad, that she has not done so, instead sending a PNG file that was a screen grab as 'evidence' is not doing her any favours in garnering support. The next couple of weeks will be really interesting to follow in this matter.

[MarkChap]

There are other issues as well
The ORIGINAL image presented by the AIPP as the image judged at APPA is different to this image, the dancer with the red dress, that was in the winners gallery on teh AIPP website
The original image looks a whole lot MORE like the image she is accused of using

[ricktas]

More here. Where this website had been in contact with the other photographer involved: https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/grave-accusations-for-leading-melbourne-photographer/


"Marcel told Inside Imaging that Lisa didn’t contacted him to arrange use of his image for her photo illustration. Lisa denies her image incorporates his image.

He said he’s fairly certain that Lisa’s photo illustration has used the ‘(tear) drop shape’ from his illustration, and described it as ‘a shameful form of plagiarism’.

Marcel said he contacted Lisa, who provided a ‘strange explanation’ that denied any wrongdoing. He said she didn’t send a RAW file, and instead shared a .PNG screenshot of a slightly different photo from Arnhem Station, with separate EXIF files. He quickly found this picture on Google, credited to another photographer."

is interesting.

[arthurking83]

I reckon it's extremely highly UNlikely that she hadn't used another image as the basis for her image.

AIPP is investigating, but her response is curious.

Why supply a png version of the image? .. surely AIPP will ask for a raw file of some sort, so why not just settle it properly now .. and not have it taken further! :rolleyes:

Problem is, AIPP will look quite stupid if it turns out that she did use Marcel's image, and the question is will they pursue it, or try to sweep it under he mat to not look stupid themselves!

[Boo53]

I guess a defence to not providing a RAW file could be that the image was captured in jpeg.

But leaving that aside the AIPP has indicated they've relied on a signed dec from all entrants are their own work and so far no blame would fall to them.

Is this the image that attracted some discussion as to what is illustration and what is photography when it originally won, or was that something else I'm remembering ?

[ricktas]

I guess a defence to not providing a RAW file could be that the image was captured in jpeg.

But leaving that aside the AIPP has indicated they've relied on a signed dec from all entrants are their own work and so far no blame would fall to them.

Is this the image that attracted some discussion as to what is illustration and what is photography when it originally won, or was that something else I'm remembering ?

Not this image, but same photographer. It was one of her other works that attracted all that attention.

Re JPG, if that was the case, why has she not come out and said so? Also considering the amount of digital painting she does to complete her illustrative photography, it is unlikely she would shoot in jpg due to the image degradation of repeated saves of jpg images, thanks to jpg's inherent lossy format.

I hope the AIPP do a media release upon completion of their investigation, with full disclosure as to how they came about their decision. And sooner rather than later to resolve this matter for everyone.

[arthurking83]

.....

Is this the image that attracted some discussion as to what is illustration and what is photography when it originally won, or was that something else I'm remembering ?

That was a couple of years ago .... some floating person in a weird landscape or something like that.
Massively over processed (so called) photograph .. made a mockery of what a photograph should be!
If it had been categorised as 'digital art' .. no problem, but an image that bears zero resemblance to a photo of any type like that particular one, was pushing the boundaries.

ie. if it had been a photojournalist comp, it would have been dumped in the first round!

Even if she used a camera that only shot in jpg(eg. like a consumer grade compact, or phone, or whatever) .. she'd be a total basket case for not having kept the original file straight from camera.
That straight from camera jpg will have identifying underlying data that would confirm if it had been straight from camera or not .. etc.
Same with tiff, which some cameras do .. etc.

But to supply a png! Don't know of any camera that can shoot png natively.

As I remember she shoots Canon and Hassleblad gear, so no excuses not to shoot raw files in her line of work.

[ricktas]

But to supply a png! Don't know of any camera that can shoot png natively.
.

The png file was a screenshot. She sent him a screen shot of her screen..with an image that was not the same as the one he was questioning her about. With a separate file containing what was supposed to be EXIF for the image inside the screenshot....And when Marcel cropped the screenshot down to just the photo and presented it to Google, that image (was not his) but another photographer's again.

[ricktas]

The original website that revealed all this has been updated. They have found many of the images from this photographer have stock elements. Which in general is fine if you want to use them for commercial work etc, if you have paid for the rights to use them. However when you look at the website and they show you some work with links to its wins, and then show the rules for the competitions it was entered to, then the rules of those competitions have been breached.

The original website has now found several stock images that have been used repeatedly by the photographer in competition winning entries.

Just scroll down a bit to see all the new stuff: http://stopstealingphotos.com/

About 1/3 of the way down there is a heading 'Update 2/7/2019 @ 7PM / 11PM' and all the new stuff is under that.

[arthurking83]

.....

About 1/3 of the way down there is a heading 'Update 2/7/2019 @ 7PM / 11PM' and all the new stuff is under that.

:lol::lol:

AIPP's only recourse now is to create a new category just for Lisa .. "Stock Photography User of the year" :D

I mean seriously .. she wouldn't have a photo of a bike, tree, grass! .. nothing?? :confused013


This story gets funnier every day!

[ricktas]

It is certainly looking that way IMO.

On social media some of her supporters have been getting stuck into those that are asking the questions. Blaming them for destroying a great photographer. Her silence on this is what is destroying her reputation, not people on social media. If she has not 'borrowed' any photos, clipart etc from others, why let your name continue to be dragged through the mud? Interestingly, in the last 24 hours or so, most of her supporters have been deleting all their comments on social media. I can only surmise (1) she has asked them to (2) the AIPP has asked them to (3) they realise they have been conned as well.

There were suggestions yesterday that she had attempted self harm.. and was blaming the photostealers website for this. Apparently this self harm was also not true. Whilst she may not be in a good place, mentally, she needs to come out and publicly clarify the accuracy, or not, of the claims. While she remains silent, people are going to question her integrity. There really is only one solution to this now, she needs to publicly tell everyone what has transpired, truthfully.

[ricktas]

She has removed a heap of her images from her website, facebook and instagram.

The AIPP logo has been removed from her website in the last 24 hours.

[ricktas]

and the AIPP logo is back on her website.

Not sure what that means. The AIPP have not come out with a decision at this point. I wonder if she took it down and her lawyers told her to put it back up until after a decision is published.

[Liney]

OK, I'm probably being a bit slow here but I'd be grateful if you can clarify the situation.

The photo in question appears to be a lump of architecture with a figure on it. There are three images of the lump of architecture, each with a different figure on it. The concern appears to be over one image where the figure appears to have been changed and claimed as the photographers own.

While I am not saying that the image has been tampered with or vice versa, or even that this sort of thing doesn't go on, to me I keep thinking that if this was a lump of architecture what's to stop someone else taking a similar photo of the same place? Is this taking the image and claiming it as yours or just a form of plagiarism where you see something you like and decide to try it for yourself.

So please point out the error in my thinking. Cheers

[ricktas]

OK, I'm probably being a bit slow here but I'd be grateful if you can clarify the situation.

The photo in question appears to be a lump of architecture with a figure on it. There are three images of the lump of architecture, each with a different figure on it. The concern appears to be over one image where the figure appears to have been changed and claimed as the photographers own.

While I am not saying that the image has been tampered with or vice versa, or even that this sort of thing doesn't go on, to me I keep thinking that if this was a lump of architecture what's to stop someone else taking a similar photo of the same place? Is this taking the image and claiming it as yours or just a form of plagiarism where you see something you like and decide to try it for yourself.

So please point out the error in my thinking. Cheers

Hi Liney, if you go back to the very first post in this thread and click the link.. look down through the article, it has been updated several times. It is not just one image now, but quite a few.

Now regarding the original photo. The photographer who took the photo first (Marcel) contacted Lisa and during their conversations, he provided the RAW file of his image. Lisa has been unable to do the same. Lisa then claimed her photo was taken at Disney in the USA. People in the US then questioned that as they had not seen this particular place at Disney. Lisa has not clarified this at all since. Marcel then took his claim to the AIPP, and about a week later, to Photo Stealers.

Since it became public, Lisa (through her lawyers) was asked to provide the RAW file again to prove she took the photo, this has not happened. In the meantime, people have started looking at her other work that has won competitions and found a lot of elements are not her work, but rather stock clipart and images.

I think she is very talented in Photoshop and produces some amazing Illustrative digital art. However, when you read the rules of entering AIPP etc competitions, they state that all elements must be 100% the work of the photographer. The longer she remains silent, the more people are digging through her winning entries and providing evidence of third party elements.

From the AIPP competition entry requirements : The competition guidelines for AIPP/APPA for that year state that: “All elements in an image must be the work of the photographer” and “The use of stock photography, purchasable digital backgrounds, skies, borders and textures is prohibited.”

From The Societies competition entry requirements : “Any entry which has been reproduced from an existing photograph, portrait, graphic or any other artwork produced by another person is a violation of the competition rules and will be disqualified.”

I think the mounting evidence is not in Lisa's favour. Here is a link to one of her winning works, with the commercially available 'elements' on the right. Certainly and very validly questions her meeting the above competition entry rules: https://i.imgur.com/KDO30HZ.jpg

And another: https://i.imgur.com/p94VBiz.jpg

If you have some time, have a read of the full article in the original link I posted in the very first post in this thread, it has been updated repeatedly: http://stopstealingphotos.com/lisa-saad-photographer-melbourne-australia/

It will be interesting to see what the AIPP has to say when it has concluded its investigation.

[Liney]

Thanks Ricktas, it is clearer now

[ricktas]

In this article from 2016 (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-01/australian-professional-photography-awards-40th-annual/7803924) (when she won APPA Professional Photographer of the Year) she is quoted as saying "Every image has been photographed, so all the little elements I've gone out and photographed, and then I've combined them into Photoshop and so they look probably more like photo illustrations."

it was her win as Photographer of the Year at that time that got Ken Duncan all riled up : https://www.facebook.com/kenduncanphotographer/photos/as-an-honorary-life-member-of-the-aipp-i-am-concerned-about-the-regulations-and-/10153702019366433/

[ricktas]

Petapixel have picked up the story: https://petapixel.com/2019/02/13/award-winning-photographer-lisa-saad-accused-of-stealing-photos/

[agb]

The tangled web of photo manipulation.

[ricktas]

http://www.capturemag.com.au/latest/aipp-disqualifies-lisa-saad-image-from-national-awards-the-appas

AIPP have disqualified one winning photo so far

Shit will hit the fan big time.

[Boo53]

Interesting..

But re-reading the 2016 article where Ken Duncan was complaining about photo manipulation to this extent being legitimate "Photography" it mentioned she'd published a book of images using a $20k gofundme account. She also had the subsequent book for sale for $195.00 each, and prints for upwards of $2500. I wonder what those owners might be thinking about now

[ricktas]

Interesting..

But re-reading the 2016 article where Ken Duncan was complaining about photo manipulation to this extent being legitimate "Photography" it mentioned she'd published a book of images using a $20k gofundme account. She also had the subsequent book for sale for $195.00 each, and prints for upwards of $2500. I wonder what those owners might be thinking about now

She has also sold prints for $15k and more. The fallout from this is going to v go on for months.

[Boo53]

$15k !!!!!, no wonder Ken Duncan is not a fan

[Ionica]

Interesting..

But re-reading the 2016 article where Ken Duncan was complaining about photo manipulation to this extent being legitimate "Photography" it mentioned she'd published a book of images using a $20k gofundme account. She also had the subsequent book for sale for $195.00 each, and prints for upwards of $2500. I wonder what those owners might be thinking about now

She needed crowd funding ? :scrtch:

[ricktas]

She has deleted her entire facebook presence. Her business and personal pages are all gone. Her website is still up at this time

http://www.lisasaad.com/

her instagram is still up: https://www.instagram.com/lisasaad/?hl=en

I am guessing we will see all her brand links disappear as the companies pull out of supporting her shortly. Lisa lists herself as a brand ambassador for brand ambassador for Manfrotto, Epson, Phottix, Tamron and Eizo.

Her studio site is still up: https://www.gothamstudios.net/

[paulheath]

Bit of a long read.......

I am writing to advise you of the findings of the AIPP Awards Committee and independent specialist advice into the alleged breaches of entry rules, including alleged plagiarism, by Lisa Saad into the AIPP 2018 APPA Awards.
The AIPP became aware of rumours just over two weeks ago and sighted public accusations on Monday 4th February. We issued a media release on February 5th to indicate we would take the time to fully investigate the matter in the interests of due process and fairness to all. We advised you as members early this week.
The Institute also instructed Legal Counsel with a view to advising on several aspects of the allegations. The Board also appointed independent experts to advise us on potential rules breaches. The Awards Committee sought RAW files from Lisa Saad. It also made various enquiries about certain aspects and inconsistencies that were not self-evident from information provided.
As a result, regrettably, the image in question, submitted in the Commercial category of the AIPP Australian Professional Photography Awards in 2018, has now been disqualified, for breaches of rules of entry that have only now become apparent. Those rules include, amongst others:
· that all elements of an entry must be the work of the entrant;
· that "the use of third-party imagery such as stock photography ... is prohibited";
· that "Entries that have been plagiarised, either knowingly or subconsciously, will be disqualified";
· that digital manipulation is allowed ... but not to create new elements; and
· that, in the case of composites and digital manipulation, all entrants must be able to supply a copy or proof of each element used to create the final image (and that failure to provide such proof may result in disqualification).
As many members will be aware further allegations have been made in the public arena in relation to earlier State and National entries dating back several years. Those are now undergoing similar detailed study and analysis for compliance with rules of entry. The Awards Committee has further images being reassessed. Time is needed to complete that work.
The AIPP Board is very conscious that many members will have had Lisa as a Judge of their prints in the Awards. Some people may also have lost out with otherwise winning images in various categories, in relation to the images now additionally being reviewed. All of this is being considered along with the ramifications for prizes. As before, once the re-assessment has occurred members will be advised along with specific actions resulting from that. The further investigation is well advanced and new RAW files have been requested.
The AIPP has also communicated with fellow organisations around the world also grappling with similar issues, including New Zealand. The ramifications are significant. One immediate action is that the AIPP will be proposing to these same bodies a joint taskforce to review rules and entry criteria for images involving digital illustration, to recommend a new worldwide standard from the overarching national professional bodies to prevent future occurrences of this nature.
We are committed to fairness and due process. We have been criticised for taking time to carry out the investigation. But with so much riding on a correct view, including the reputations of our Awards, the photographers, the AIPP itself and those directly affected by judging and results, we had to be completely sure of the correct outcome for all parties.
We ask for your continued patience to ensure once again that the correct assessment is made on the added images being reassessed.
We have communicated with Lisa Saad the disqualification of the 2018 image. Naturally the impact on her is significant and is highly regrettable. Her friends will be a vital part in her continued wellbeing, which remains a key concern, not-withstanding the adverse findings. We will not be opening this matter up for discussion in the AIPP Community Facebook Page until the investigation is complete. We also encourage members to refrain from adverse comment in this matter elsewhere in social media. Of course, emotions will be very intense. But please remember! Many people more than just the two photographers in this specific matter are affected. The emotional impact is very challenging and painful and will vary, so please choose words carefully. Once the AIPP investigation is complete we will open up moderated discussion within our own Facebook community page.
We are advising the photo media of the outcome today, as well as AIPP Trade Partners and Sponsors.
John Swainston, National President
14 February 2019

[ricktas]

...· that "Entries that have been plagiarised, either knowingly or subconsciously, will be disqualified";

How do you subconsciously steal someone else's work?.. over and over with different people's work.

I am looking forward to reading a statement directly from Lisa about all this.

[jim]

...· that "Entries that have been plagiarised, either knowingly or subconsciously, will be disqualified";

How do you subconsciously steal someone else's work?.. over and over with different people's work.

I am looking forward to reading a statement directly from Lisa about all this.

Over and over is a bit of a stretch, but it's surprisingly common that artists unknowingly repeat work they've seen then forgotten about.
Not that that seems to be the case here, but you can see why they'd phrase their opinions cautiously.

[ricktas]

Over and over is a bit of a stretch, but it's surprisingly common that artists unknowingly repeat work they've seen then forgotten about.
Not that that seems to be the case here, but you can see why they'd phrase their opinions cautiously.

re the over and over.. They are now investigating her work back to 2009 that have other people's work embedded in them. So over and over it is. Have a read of the photo stealers post (in my very first post in this thread) it is not about copying others ideas and concepts, but about taking others work (downloading it), and placing that work into her own images.

Have a read of the story about the Bonsia.. she told everyone that the bonsai belonged to her recently deceased mother and she added it to her heart image as it had such meaning to her personally. But the bonsai photo has now been found to belong to another photographer, she downloaded it and added it to her construct. It never had any special meaning to her.

Lisa talks about her heart image and the bonsai : http://www.lisasaad.com/lisasaadphotography/dissecting-the-heart-from-the-anonymous-man-series/

And here is the same bonsai.. as taken by the original photographer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/3505817487

So over and over she stole other people's work and lied about it being her own.

[arthurking83]

.... We have communicated with Lisa Saad the disqualification of the 2018 image. Naturally the impact on her is significant and is highly regrettable. Her friends will be a vital part in her continued wellbeing, which remains a key concern, not-withstanding the adverse findings. We will not be opening this matter up for discussion in the AIPP Community Facebook Page until the investigation is complete. We also encourage members to refrain from adverse comment in this matter elsewhere in social media. Of course, emotions will be very intense. But please remember! Many people more than just the two photographers in this specific matter are affected. The emotional impact is very challenging and painful and will vary, so please choose words carefully....

I understand that they need to display a certain level of sensitivity at this particular time ... but SERIOUSLY!!??

Are we supposed to feel sympathy for a blatant 'cheat'.
What, because she's a high profile pro photog, that the rules don't apply to her!

I'm curious as to how much sympathy she displayed towards the entries immediately behind hers, and how they felt after the awards were announced.
Imagine some up and coming, non pro, trying to make it into the pro world. Those awards can make or break a career!

I'm thinking(first thing I thought of!!) was what about the poor souls that lost out, having followed the rules!!
This is where my sympathies lie.
Not with the fragile state of someone who clearly understood the risks involved in trying to bypass the system, because they somehow feel that they're entitled.

No way! .. she's obviously done the wrong thing, now accept it, harden up and cop the flack that inevitably comes with it.

First things first is that she needs to display a strong level of respect for the others that she's done wrong by, and by that I mean apologise for relegating those other entrants and having robbed them of their rightful places!

Until she's capable of showing some respect towards those more deserving folks, that must surely have all done the hard work to achieve what they did .. LS should be shown zero sympathy from the rest of us.

It's not like she accidentally did this, which would be a totally different situation.
SHE deliberately flouted the rules, so there's intent in her work. You can't accidentally add commercial clip art, and other peoples art into your own work.

No sympathy!!

[nardes]

Fascinating stuff.

I believe that largely, our thoughts precede our actions, unless when running from a hungry predator then instincts kick in, no time to think.:)

All my life I have access to thoughts in my head/mind/consciousness; where they come from, where they live, what they are and how I get them (are they mine as opposed to someone else’s?) still eludes me. Generally, I believe that these thoughts have been influenced by my parents, teachers and the western Christian culture in which I was raised (although I am not a Christian).

So where does this slippery slope to our undoing begin?:confused013

Do we have a desperate need to be recognised and so cheat just “a little” to suddenly find that we have “won” and are now the centre of attention?

Having now tasted this addictive ego-massage by breaching the written and unwritten rules once, are the rewards so fabulous and ego needs so great that we now do it again, and again, and again, digging a deeper hole each time.

At some point, do we throw caution to the winds and simply not even consider that we are cheating as the intoxication of fame is so overwhelmingly pursued. I recall seeing this same scenario unfold when Lance Armstrong admitted he was a drug cheat, yet was still excusing himself, somehow justifying his actions. It seems that the mind can generate an “alternate reality” to that perceived by most “normal” folks.

The human mind is indeed a strange place, I am glad that I am boringly “normal”.

Cheers

Dennis

[bobt]

I understand that they need to display a certain level of sensitivity at this particular time ... but SERIOUSLY!!??

Are we supposed to feel sympathy for a blatant 'cheat'.

No way! .. she's obviously done the wrong thing, now accept it, harden up and cop the flack that inevitably comes with it.

No sympathy!!


I'm going to go out on a limb here .......

I accept totally that she has done the wrong thing - multiple times - and she is going to pay a very heavy price for what she's done. It's not dissimilar to that girl who claimed to have cancer and wrote books about "cures".

However, I am also very conscious of the mental toll that this will bring, and how people in similar situations have been driven to suicide by the overwhelming pressure of social media and public humiliation. I, for one, would not want to contribute to that and feel that my comments lead to that sort of demise.

She will lose her entire photographic life over this, her livelihood, her reputation and her self respect. I would not want her to lose her life as well.

She has been tried in the court of public opinion; she is guilty as sin - but let's tread carefully lest we become part of a global swell that could just push her over the edge.

[arthurking83]

....

She will lose her entire photographic life over this, her livelihood, her reputation and her self respect. I would not want her to lose her life as well.

....

Entirely agree Bob.
But, if there's one aspect that the world shows us time and again, is that devious minded folks, generally remain deviously minded.
There's also no way to know for sure, that any real remorse she may display is going to be genuine or not.

Her issue now, is that she's going to have a very hard time trying to convince people that she's going to be genuinely affected by her actions.
And like I said before, if she truly had any real remorse, she'd have apologised immediately once found out, knowing full well that she couldn't supply the requirements that AIPP would have demanded.
She would have done this way earlier than the demand from AIPP for files, and whatnot.

Surely she would have realised what she was doing ... I can't fathom someone of her experience not being fully aware of what she was doing.

.. so, maybe I'm a bit more sceptical than normal(or mistrustful), based on her past actions .. more importantly her inactions ... my personal opinion is that she will try to take advantage of the situation in some way.

[bobt]

.. so, maybe I'm a bit more sceptical than normal(or mistrustful), based on her past actions .. more importantly her inactions ... my personal opinion is that she will try to take advantage of the situation in some way.

I can't see her finding a silver lining anywhere here. I think she's basically screwed!

As Monty Python might have said .... "what a senseless waste of (professional) life!"

[ricktas]

The AIPP were made aware of this on the 4th February, before that, Marcel (https://www.facebook.com/MarcelvanBalken) had contacted her directly regarding her use of his photo in one of her award winning prints. She threatened to sue him. He took it to photostealers and then the AIPP. She then had her lawyers threaten photo stealers.

She would have known from the moment Marcel contacted her (sometime before the 4th Feb) that her fraud had been detected. Yet rather than admit it, she got the lawyers onto everyone.

Once it started to gain traction, she began deleting photos from her facebook. instagram etc. Photos that she knew would provide additional proof of what she had done. Did she really think she could legally threaten people to keep the truth hidden?

It is now 11 days since the AIPP began their investigation. And from the releases it seems she has not even admitted to the AIPP that she has done this.

She has not apologised to Marcel (I asked him this morning), his only contact with her has been the letters from her lawyer, threatening him, and demanding payment..to her! The same for Corey from Photo Sleaters, Corey has not had anything beyond her demand that the posts etc be removed, and a sum of money was requested.

Whilst through all of this she damn well knew she had stolen others people's work. This tells us so much about her character.

She has had 11 days (at least) to come clean, but has not done so.

I think her actions since Marcel contacted her, tell us a lot about the person she is and the longer she goes before she provides a public apology (if she ever does), says more again about her character.

[bitsnpieces]

Sometimes it's just easier to fess up to our wrong doings than to try and cover it up, which in this case, she's just being silent, and that's not helping her case either.

Unfortunately turn of events but as bobt, hopefully doesn't go all the way south.

[arthurking83]

I can't see her finding a silver lining anywhere here. I think she's basically screwed!

.....

I think you've misunderstood the implication I've made Bob.
I'm thinking now, she'll try to use the 'sympathy card' trick, whereby she'll claim she's been under stress or whatever carp excuse .. etc, etc.

Like one post questioned above .. she needed a crowdfunding scheme to create a book to sell?
Surely a pro of her stature, with so many awards under her belt could easily generate interest in a product like that without resorting to crowdfunding?

I think there's more than enough data out now to allow us a fairly accurate indication of her personality type.

[farmmax]

It's not like she accidentally did this, which would be a totally different situation.
SHE deliberately flouted the rules, so there's intent in her work. You can't accidentally add commercial clip art, and other peoples art into your own work.

No sympathy!!

Well said! I'm with you on this one.

In every field I've competed in, there is always someone prepared to win at any cost. They lie, cheat, and do anything to win. I do not understand them, and I'm sorry, I cannot give them any sympathy. I'll reserve that for their victims.

[iphotograph]

Well said! I'm with you on this one.

In every field I've competed in, there is always someone prepared to win at any cost. They lie, cheat, and do anything to win. I do not understand them, and I'm sorry, I cannot give them any sympathy. I'll reserve that for their victims.

The latest in the Lisa Saad ordeal:

AIPP disqualifies Lisa Saad image from National Awards, the APPA's:

http://www.capturemag.com.au/latest/aipp-disqualifies-lisa-saad-image-from-national-awards-the-appas

Images disqualified from the Societies Photographer of the Year competition and qualifications:

https://thesocieties.net/blog/2019/02/18/images-disqualified-from-the-societies-photographer-of-the-year-competition-and-qualifications

PetaPixel:

https://petapixel.com/2019/02/13/award-winning-photographer-lisa-saad-accused-of-stealing-photos/

InsideImaging:

https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/lisa-saad-image-disqualified-by-aipp/

[ricktas]

The latest in the Lisa Saad ordeal:

AIPP disqualifies Lisa Saad image from National Awards, the APPA's:

http://www.capturemag.com.au/latest/aipp-disqualifies-lisa-saad-image-from-national-awards-the-appas

Images disqualified from the Societies Photographer of the Year competition and qualifications:

https://thesocieties.net/blog/2019/02/18/images-disqualified-from-the-societies-photographer-of-the-year-competition-and-qualifications

As an Australian forum, you will find most members here are being informed quite well. It is being discussed a lot in Australia.

[Mark L]

G'day iphotograph and welcome to AP. I hope you can get involved here as seeing photos from somewhere other than Australia would be occasionally refreshing.:th3:
But ATM I'm really interested as to why you should suddenly turn up here to update us on Lisa's stuff???? Do you really think you can influence anything by posting here? Did you get duded in one of the comps Lisa won?
Now since you are here maybe you can take the time to post some photos for us to look at? I'd be really happy if you were into birds.

The latest in the Lisa Saad ordeal:

AIPP disqualifies Lisa Saad image from National Awards, the APPA's:

http://www.capturemag.com.au/latest/aipp-disqualifies-lisa-saad-image-from-national-awards-the-appas

Images disqualified from the Societies Photographer of the Year competition and qualifications:

https://thesocieties.net/blog/2019/02/18/images-disqualified-from-the-societies-photographer-of-the-year-competition-and-qualifications

PetaPixel:

https://petapixel.com/2019/02/13/award-winning-photographer-lisa-saad-accused-of-stealing-photos/

InsideImaging:

https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/lisa-saad-image-disqualified-by-aipp/

[bobt]

Does this mean I have to return the award she gave me in our club competition last year? :lol::lol:

[iphotograph]

Thanks for the welcome! Sorry to post such negative news about a fellow photographer on my first post here. Was not my intention to fan the flames but only to share information. I have had several of my images stolen in the past by real estate agents, brokers, mortgage companies, etc. and it is a sore subject to me personally. My apologies!

Yes, I am into shooting wild birds as a pastime when not shooting properties. I would love to show a few but most were lost late last year when my external storage device bit the dust. They were not able to be recovered. I will hunt around online and see if I can find a few in any of my online ports. I also shoot swimsuit, landscapes, severe weather, and scenics when I have a chance. And just recently I have started messing around with aerial video.

I do have a couple of links to some of my real estate work if you care to take a look. It is a workflow that I worked on for nearly four years to try and perfect. I discovered by accident a flaw in one of the pieces of software I use to merge my brackets that allows me a lot more control during processing. All the shots in the links below were shot with a 5 shot bracket with a "twist".

https://500px.com/jfertic/galleries/real-estate

https://www.houzz.com/projects/users/jfertic79

The other reasons I joined this forum was because I really liked the layout and I wanted to see actual images shot by locals of Australia. You guys are very lucky to have such great scenery at your doorsteps! I live just North of Tampa Florida and all we have here that is consistent is beach sunsets and heavy weather photography. Most of the better landscapes here in the US is found mostly in our Western Regions.

So thanks again for the welcome! Looking forward to getting more involved in this forum here in the near future!

[ricktas]

138691

[bobt]

138691

Hmmm ... this doesn't lead anywhere (not for me at least).

- - - Updated - - -


Hmmm ... this doesn't lead anywhere (not for me at least).

It just says "Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator"

[agb]

Hmmm ... this doesn't lead anywhere (not for me at least).

- - - Updated - - -



It just says "Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator"
Yes,same here.

[ricktas]

Sorry. This occurs when I post from my phone sometimes. Will try again.

138697

[Mark L]

A big :th3::th3: to who discovered and followed though on this. It must have taken so much effort for Lisa to create this false world and I kind of have to wonder why when you always run the risk of being exposed?
How many others haven't been discovered?

[ricktas]

The 'not admitting guilt' bit got me. She is still refusing to even acknowledge what she has done. Even to Marcel and the other artists she has stolen from, she has not even attempted to explain this.

[Glenda]

The 'not admitting guilt' bit got me. She is still refusing to even acknowledge what she has done. Even to Marcel and the other artists she has stolen from, she has not even attempted to explain this.

Exactly, she has handled this very badly. To have the audacity to get her solicitor to write a letter demanding an apology and monetary recompense, knowing full well what she had done over the years, shows both a massive ego and stupidity IMO.

[Ionica]

It will be interesting to see whether she will now receive similar claims , and whether she will be required to return any monetary prizes received .

[ricktas]

Exactly, she has handled this very badly. To have the audacity to get her solicitor to write a letter demanding an apology and monetary recompense, knowing full well what she had done over the years, shows both a massive ego and stupidity IMO.

Publicly, only a small part of this story is known. A lot is being kept under wraps. Consider this snppet from the AIPP's media release "The Institute also instructed Legal Counsel..". Now consider why would the AIPP need legal counsel unless legal threats had been made against them too? I wonder who might have threatened the AIPP through their lawyer.

[Boo53]

As some 70+ awards globally have been involved across 6 different awards bodies, this is not isolated just to Australia. This must be seen as an opportunity to further strengthen validity of entries for the benefit of the vast majority of honest and compliant photographers entering photographic awards.

This is going to take a fair bit of work to sort out even now.

However, whilst this sort of cheating is possible no matter what the category, I would have to suggest the heavily manipulated category that seems to be the main issue here would seem to be easier to cheat in. Perhaps this category needs to be reconsidered.

With a body which has the sort standing that the AIPP tries to achieve I would have expected finalists in National or state awards to have been required to provide a copy of the raw file upon reaching the finals.

Bit of extra work but the more professional the actions the more professional the appearance

[ricktas]

As some 70+ awards globally have been involved across 6 different awards bodies, this is not isolated just to Australia. This must be seen as an opportunity to further strengthen validity of entries for the benefit of the vast majority of honest and compliant photographers entering photographic awards.

This is going to take a fair bit of work to sort out even now.

However, whilst this sort of cheating is possible no matter what the category, I would have to suggest the heavily manipulated category that seems to be the main issue here would seem to be easier to cheat in. Perhaps this category needs to be reconsidered.

With a body which has the sort standing that the AIPP tries to achieve I would have expected finalists in National or state awards to have been required to provide a copy of the raw file upon reaching the finals.

Bit of extra work but the more professional the actions the more professional the appearance

I agree John, and interestingly you may recall Ken Duncan in 2016 having quite a lot to say about this style of Art. He argued that it is not photography and therefore should not be part of the AIPP or if it was, it was a completely separated category that could not win overall 'Photographer of the Year'. He received a lot of support for his views at the time, but the AIPP powers that be chose to ignore. As the fallout from Ms Saad's efforts reverberate around the planet, we may see changes ahead in regards to this.

Personally, I think, if the AIPP and other bodies (internationally) do not treat this seriously and review current status-quo then they will continue to lose memberships and become less important in the scheme of things. My understanding is the AIPP currently has less than 2000 members (this was stated by an AIPP member this past week, elsewhere on the web).

https://procounter.com.au/2016/09/08/ken-duncan-appas-highjacked-manipulators/

https://www.facebook.com/kenduncanphotographer/photos/as-an-honorary-life-member-of-the-aipp-i-am-concerned-about-the-regulations-and-/10153702019366433/