Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Of course this is a judgement call, and as such, I would tend to be conservative. 

 

It would not surprise me if Hitchcock copyrighted his famous shadow image. Mickey Mouse? I've had stock business dealings with Disney; they are ready to sue anyone about anything. 

 

On the other hand . . . a toe or a finger is actually part of a person. A shadow is not:ph34r:

 

 

Nor is a silhouette!

Edited by Chrissie
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Of course this is a judgement call, and as such, I would tend to be conservative. 

 

It would not surprise me if Hitchcock copyrighted his famous shadow image. Mickey Mouse? I've had stock business dealings with Disney; they are ready to sue anyone about anything. 

 

On the other hand . . . a toe or a finger is actually part of a person. A shadow is not:ph34r:

 

 

Nor is a silhouette!

 

 

 

Oh, I wouldn't agree with you there, Chrissie. A silhouette is a strongly backlit photo of a person . . . it most certainly needs a release if used for commercial purposes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, a silhouette is definitely a person -- one who just happens to be back-lit.

 

I remain confused -- probably permanently -- about shadows, though, and will continue to make them RM (Really Murky). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, a silhouette is definitely a person -- one who just happens to be back-lit.

 

I remain confused -- probably permanently -- about shadows, though, and will continue to make them RM (Really Murky). 

Yup and a shadow is a front lit illusion ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since missing lunch, I'm just a shadow of myself. Now I need to go shadow someone in a shadowy alley. Might be a picture in it.

Noun, verb, adverb.

Edited by Betty LaRue
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think you are over analysing the situation. In the given image only the photographer can know what the shadow represents truly or if it is a 3rd party then the photographer should know if that person has any chance of recognising themselves from that photo.

Otherwise i really wouldnt worry

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Over analyzing?" Steve, that might be an understatement. John is there in Vancouver; it's winter; he's bored, and he wants to go south where they speak Spanish. And that other shadow? That could be a tree . . . or it might be the woman I had a coffee date with about a year go.  :unsure:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Over analyzing?" Steve, that might be an understatement. John is there in Vancouver; it's winter; he's bored, and he wants to go south where they speak Spanish. And that other shadow? That could be a tree . . . or it might be the woman I had a coffee date with about a year go.  :unsure:

 

Por supuesto, I'd love to head south and escape the sogginess.

 

Actually, it was a serious question. I thought some of the answers were pretty interesting and entertaining.

 

I gather that the relationship with the tree-woman didn't blossom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Por supuesto, I'd love to head south and escape the sogginess.

 

 

 

I'm in Colombia at the moment. I'd say whilst there is quite a diverse cross-section of visitors, those of Canuck extraction are the most common... escaping the cold. If its the cost which is stopping you I am spending less than €25 a day and I could be doing it cheaper.

 

 

One of the nice things about travel in most of Latin America is that you can still do it well on a limited budget. In fact, travelling on the cheap is the most rewarding way to go IME.

 

Interesting to hear that there are a lot of Canadians in Colombia. The country is on my list as well.

 

¡Bien viaje!

Edited by John Mitchell
Link to post
Share on other sites

the-shadows-of-anonymous-people-are-seen

 

From Alamy: How many “real” people can you see in the image, including crowd scenes &

parts of the body or silhouettes?

 

 

Well they're not recognisable of course, but my shadows work is attributed to the number of figures - so this one has More than 4.

 

Rgds,

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the-shadows-of-anonymous-people-are-seen

 

From Alamy: How many “real” people can you see in the image, including crowd scenes &

parts of the body or silhouettes?

 

 

Well they're not recognisable of course, but my shadows work is attributed to the number of figures - so this one has More than 4.

 

Rgds,

Richard.

 

Do you mean that that you clicked on "more than four" people for this image in "Attributes"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a similar question about two weeks, it was titled Manage Image 


 


Hi all


 


In the attributes section of manage images do I have to indicate that people are in the image if they are just shadows?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I asked a similar question about two weeks, it was titled Manage Image 

 

Hi all

 

In the attributes section of manage images do I have to indicate that people are in the image if they are just shadows?  

 

 

Here I go, over-analyzing again, but you could argue that a photographic image of a person is itself just a type of shadow.

 

I wonder what Plato wold have answered this question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I just found this: 

 

"When answering the question regarding number of people, you should only list 'real people'. But this should also include body parts, silhouettes, obscured views of people where they are unrecognizable, famous people, indigenous people and crowd scenes."

 

Source: How many people are in this picture?

 

It doesn't say anything about shadows, though.

 

 

While I agree that a silhouette is a person, I don't understand why a release is needed even if the person is unrecognizable.

Edited by chrumu
Link to post
Share on other sites

John did the entertaining trick. Stirred up ideas for an over-interpretation of a good rule, quite entertaining. I will not get neurotic about my images, though.

 

Of course, shadows do not require a release unless so special that you'll probably never run into the very rare and special case. (Hitler and de Gaulle are not around any longer).

 

I understand Richard's idea about ticking the number of shadowed people in his image. That is for his benefit.

 

 

Just trying to keep up the stir of commotion:

 

What about look-alikes? And posters of a person in the image??

 

(I know what I'd do, of course).

Edited by Niels Quist
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to argue along the lines of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, how about a historical picture of a woman taken in Canada in 1900?

 
In 1900 in Canada women were not considered persons in law. Therefore you would have to answer no persons in this picture.
 
A person may own their hands, but does a person own their shadow? Another reason to fear for humanity.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you want to argue along the lines of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, how about a historical picture of a woman taken in Canada in 1900?

 
In 1900 in Canada women were not considered persons in law. Therefore you would have to answer no persons in this picture.
 
A person may own their hands, but does a person own their shadow? Another reason to fear for humanity.

 

 

I thought of the Canadian "persons" example as well. I wonder how many places in the world still don't consider women to be "persons" in the legal sense.

 

Personally, I don't think that we can really own anything, not even our shadows. You can't take it with you, as they say.

 

Take heed, Mr. Trump. B)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

 

 

I asked a similar question about two weeks, it was titled Manage Image 

 

Hi all

 

In the attributes section of manage images do I have to indicate that people are in the image if they are just shadows?  

 

 

Here I go, over-analyzing again, but you could argue that a photographic image of a person is itself just a type of shadow.

 

I wonder what Plato wold have answered this question.

 

 

 

Plato wold? Is that Greek?  

 

I was hunting down this subject and decided to reply at this late date . . . because I know how much Wim enjoys "Lazarus" threads.  B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I asked a similar question about two weeks, it was titled Manage Image 

 

Hi all

 

In the attributes section of manage images do I have to indicate that people are in the image if they are just shadows?  

 

 

Here I go, over-analyzing again, but you could argue that a photographic image of a person is itself just a type of shadow.

 

I wonder what Plato wold have answered this question.

 

 

 

Plato wold? Is that Greek?  

 

I was hunting down this subject and decided to reply at this late date . . . because I know how much Wim enjoys "Lazarus" threads.  B)

 

 

Nope, it's Old English.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plato wold? Is that Greek?  

 

I was hunting down this subject and decided to reply at this late date . . . because I know how much Wim enjoys "Lazarus" threads.  B)

 

Please don't start the competition who can revitalize the oldest  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.