Satellite photography - a rule breaker?

[Steve B]

Last night I mentioned to a few members a book I had seen by Benjamin Grant. Essentially he uses high-definition satellites to create abstract images of earth - see the website http://www.dailyoverview.com/home2 and attached. Some of the images are stunning and I'm planning a Christmas project to see what I can do.

However, although he has won prizes for his work, it got me wondering whether his images fall within our competition rules? Chris suggested it is a grey area. He is not using his own equipment, but there is certainly skill in researching locations and arranging a successful composition. I'm not seeking a formal ruling, but thought it would be an interesting debate!

This is my first post and I've not worked out how to reduce image size, so apologies for that.

Steve

[Mike Farley]

Hi Steve

First off, welcome to the forum. I hope that you will find it to be a useful resource.

Photography, by its nature, is diverse and I have not seen satellite imagery used in this way before. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. It is certainly interesting and has an aesthetic attraction.

As for whether such pictures would be eligible for club competitions, my view is that Chris is incorrect when he says it is a grey area. As currently written, the rules do not prohibit the use of someone else's work. However that is just semantics and the introduction to the rules states:

"The main objectives of internal competitions are to provide a means by which members can obtain feedback from experienced photographic judges, to provide an element of competition and to provide some fun, all of which is aimed at improving standards."

We are a camera club and one of our aims is to help members enhance their photography. While they are not explicit in that regard, the spirit of the rules is that images submitted into competition are photographs which are entirely the work of the entrant. That is the reason that Chris said it is a grey area. I am afraid that I do not really agree when you say there is "skill in researching locations and arranging a successful composition". I suppose that there is some editing expertise involved, but nothing which could be described as being photographic.

I suggest that you ask yourself a number of questions:

• Does submitting these satellite derived images help me to advance my own photography?
• Would I be happy to compete against someone else who was using work obtained from another source?
• Is this something I really want to do, when the primary objectives are improvement and enjoyment from friendly competition?

My suggestion is that rather being submitted into club competition, use of such images would be better suited to a presentation at a members' evening.

If you still wish to go ahead, you should note that the section on image manipulation states:

"Manipulation is accepted in the Print & DPI categories provided that ALL elements are created SOLELY from the member’s own work."

The main purpose of that section is to ensure that composite images are created entirely by the author. Since there is no definition of manipulation, technically just about anything which can be done in a photo editing application would count. The sole exception I can think of would be cropping.

Long answer, but your question raises some valid points. I hope that you have found the response informative and that it helps you come to a decision.

[Steve B]

Hi Mike

Thanks for taking the time to give think about this and post your thoughts; you make some interesting points.

If I have interpreted your post correctly, most of your doubts relate to whether the photographer is the author of his own work and how much merit or skill is involved in this style of photography. For me, there isn't so much difference between this and other forms of aerial photography. For example, he could have taken a near identical shot by driving to the location, mounting his camera on a drone and triggering the shutter remotely from the ground while watching the scene change from an iPAD. Rather I see the satellite as an extension of the photographer's eye and his skill is to recognise how to identify patterns and/or a combination of shapes which achieve a pleasing, balanced or striking abstract composition.

He is an environmental photographer, with a message in many of his images about man's impact on the environment. So particularly in his case, I would stand by my point that background research is a key ingredient which helps him to create successful images that communicate powerfully the points he seeks to make. Of course, once published, his images could easily be replicated, but then again this is true of many locations. And the earth is big enough, and constantly changing, to create unlimited possibilities for others to make original work. Indeed, perhaps an advantage of Google Earth, whatever one's views of the company might be, is that this style of photography is freely available for anyone with an internet connection to try, although perhaps it is harder than it looks.

Based on these points, from my perspective, I disagree with your view that his images could be assessed as someone else's work, or at least not entirely his own work. I feel that I could enhance my own skills as a photographer by learning from his use of composition, colour and so on, as could other members. And since I see merit/skill in creating his images, and anyone can access the technology, I also think it would satisfy your fun and friendly competition tests.

Anyway, interesting how advances in technology open up such debates.

Steve

[Mike Farley]

Hi Steve

Club competition, which was the subject of your original question, primarily exists to promote members’ image making skills at each point of the process. Bypassing the taking stage does not necessarily invalidate that, but does introduce other considerations. I am not sure I would want to participate in or witness a contest in which the entrants submitted pictures where the source material was derived from elsewhere. That said, Benjamin Grant’s work does have interest and value in other contexts, which I acknowledged.

As I said, photography is wide ranging and exists in a number of diverse forms. It follows that individual approaches to learning, development and achievement will vary equally widely. Camera club photography is just one aspect of that. Examining the artistic output of others, not only in photography, has long been an accepted way to gain inspiration. If looking at this type of imagery and emulating it helps you attain your goals, I for one would encourage you in that pursuit.

I look forward to seeing the results of your efforts, just not in competition for my own preference.

[davidb]

It would be interesting to hear from international competitions and their thoughts on the subject. But being so far down the food chain I doubt very much that we'll ever know!

That said, I've just looked at the website and there's some interesting pictures.

[Mike Farley]

It would be interesting to hear from international competitions and their thoughts on the subject. But being so far down the food chain I doubt very much that we'll ever know!

That's easy. Just look at their rules and see whether they require that entries are wholly the work of the author.

[GrahamL]

Hi Steve,

Interesting question.

My feeling is that if the photograph is essentially unchanged deference should be given to the creator and copyright holder. i.e. You can't really regard the work as yours, though it can of course be used to exemplify a point or support an argument, subject to the use being non-commercial or acceptable to the copyright holder. Even if the originator has publicly declared they do not retain copyright to me it feels ethically wrong not to cite the source of the image.

However, if your work is transformative, i.e. the nature of the image is significantly changed, use as your own creation may well be fine. However, it still may hit the buffers against a photographic competition's rules if it's stated that all of the photographic imagery used has to have been taken by the author. I found an interesting threads discussing the subject. See: ' When Is An Image 'Manipulated Enough' To Become An Original Creation?'" Techdirt 2013 https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130408/08031822622/when-is-image-manipulated-enough-to-become-original-creation.shtml

This is where it crosses into the complex and very grey are of 'fair use'. For instance where it is acceptable to use another person's creative work in a transformative way. It's probably not worth going into any further - but in case of interest here's a couple of articles I found touching on the subject:
1) 'Appropriation Art and Fair Use' - Comment on a 2013 US case on the artistic use of someone's copyrighted photograph without their permission, see http://www.maw-law.com/copyright/appropriation-art-and-fair-use/
2) 'Fair Use or Infringement?' by Linda Joy Kattwinkel (2013) Article on the general principles of 'fair use': https://graphicartistsguild.org/tools_resources/fair-use-or-infringement

I guess in terms of your proposed project much would depend on the terms by which the copyright holder has provided the satellite digital images for public use. The use you mention may well be acceptable to the provider, but I suspect not to those managing a photographic competition. However it may well have be no problem being exhibited in other forums, such as in a book or article.

Complicated, maybe best avoided.

Cheers,

Graham

[walterconquy]

Hullo all, that was a hell of a set of pictures. Personally I don't care how you get the pictures as long as you personally take the picture.
Some of us scan pictures in a scanner, no camera, and get pretty good certificate winning images and good comments also.
It seems to me its like the argument between film and digital again we have to move on from stereotypical comments as much as i argued against digital, I am now quite an advocate.
Whatever the arguments, a lot of those images were beautiful.
Regards Wally

[Paul Heester]

I agree with Wally that they are amazing images and put mans influence on the planet into perspective (pun intended).

Would they be allowed in competitions? Thats not for me to say but a parallel to this in my view are photos of graffiti. Did you create the graffiti? No, but you took an image of it. Same with Benjamin Grant, he used satellite images and put his own take on it.

From a personal view I wouldnt feel comfortable showing these images as a photographer myself but if I was an artist then why not.

[Steve B]

Thanks to everyone for the interesting contributions, and thanks for the links David.

Paul - I''m half-tempted to reply about the difference between a photographer and an artist - I've always thought a photographer can count as an artist under certain conditions - but perhaps that's best left as a debate for another day...!

Steve