#FOUND #2

#FOUND #2
© All Rights Reserved

Hey all, this is a follow up to my previous image,

this 'graph was found on the same CD as the last upload with the woman on the swing.

It's probably at the same location, at first I thought De Waal Park but not sure...

Another piece of the puzzle

14h22 Friday
17, September
2010
  • love 03
  • switch zoom in/out
 
found, black and white, chance, park, cape town
  • M CO., L
    1970
  • +
  1. #FOUND PREV
  2. #FOUND #3 NEXT
15 Comments
 
  1. caprisel

    m tempted to post my fffffounds as well. grandpa ws a grapher not proffesional tho. why not make this a theme? :)

  2. Matt

    I love black and white...this is fantastic.

  3. Native Soul

    just post i say, the more the merrier, found photography
    is vanacular photogrphy at its best, ordinary to extra ordinary-
    flip context on its head.

  4. Nappy Head

    native :)

  5. Buchu

    @Native, word! Posting found photography is like editing archive video, or curating,
    even though you didn't shoot it you are still being creative
    in the selection/ what you do with it...
    I think this would make a great theme, Lebogang you reading this?

  6. lebogang nkoane

    I am reading this — sure a theme can be ran from this — but, the question is: who has photography they didn't take?

  7. Buchu

    I'm sure most of us do...
    Like caprisel said, she's got pics her grandfather took.
    We can scan old pics like that,
    or even go into a 2nd hand shop, and find old pics there (i like doing that) and scan em.
    These days, we also got the internet... http://ffffound.com/

    You can get creative wid it. The trick would be to find really interesting pics.

  8. caprisel

    me! :) old family albums cum on :)

  9. caprisel

    besides the concept of fffffound can mean u have to go find them :)

  10. lebogang nkoane

    Now that you mention ffffound you've now brought this up:

    Copyright, specifically for 75, which states: http://75.co.za/info#tos

    Every photograph is owned by the respective photographer and it is assumed by it being uploaded, they (the photographer) has the legal right to do so.

    Now — I am all good for the theme as long this copyright (terms of use) is NOT violated. Which then means, ffffound images cannot be uploaded on 75, unless you can prove you have permission from the owner of the photograph.

  11. lebogang nkoane

    Which in fact brings up what Shy1 said — http://75.co.za/buchu/2010/09/16#response-64718 — of which I now can I agree with her: you do not own the photographs, does that grant you the right to post 'em here? If the answer is yes: then it sets precedence on allowing any photograph (with or without permission) to be uploaded.

    Although, on your current 'series' of photographs: there was 'in the creative context' justification of uploading the photographs, but it does not hold in context with 'copyright' terms of 75: and it is a violation of using 75 and the person owns the photographs.

    Aside: I do think the people at Orms did respond to this too: http://twitter.com/OrmsDirect/status/24747591987

    My other question is: if you had taken photographs, and which ever shop you developed them, duplicates where made, you got your copies — and sometime in the future you saw your photograph being published somewhere (newspaper, blog, social network) would you shrug it off, or would you see it as a violation of your copyright?

    I know I am going of topic here with respect to the theme — we can have a theme, but I do not agree to 75 engaging in the very thing that would deny 75 to exist: original content.

    So, I would suggest if we are going to engage in a theme — any theme for that matter — can we have a way of knowing for sure (at the very least an illusion of it) that the photograph uploaded does not violate any legal and moral right of the owner of that photograph.

  12. Uno

    Just to provoque this debate a bit more:

    "Like Marcel Duchamp before him, Damien Hirst has suggested that a painting can be considered an adapted found object (the object being paint), i.e. the whole history of art is based on the found objects."

    Sooooo: aren't all photographs on 75 already ffffffound by their respective graphers? What are we trying to achieve by using other people's photographs? Are we getting so out of new ideas to explore the medium that we need to borrow images?

  13. Uno

    some more:

    "Good artists borrow, great artists steal, crap artists get caught stealing."

  14. Buchu

    Haha @ Uno
    @Lebogang, valid points,
    If these were my pics I would not feel violated, as long as someone wasn't making money off of them, or claiming it as their own. I think that's a moral issue though.

    In legal terms ( I know nothing about this stuff- I'm just playing devils advocate) Is what I have done really illegal? I.e, I paid for a CD of my own photos and I got these. If so, can I upload them, share them on 75? How does one place copyright on their images or is that just a given when you take a pic. (For musicians, they have register with SAMRO for example.)

    Also, I agree about not posting ffffound type pics, but instead
    "can we have a way of knowing for sure (at the very least an illusion of it) that the photograph uploaded does not violate any legal and moral right of the owner of that photograph."

    Yes- like Caprisel's, family pics, as long as we make sure the owner of the photograph is cool with it/ credit them / no copyright on them?

    @UP will attempt to answer your questions if this idea catches on...

  15. NguJaz

    wrt image: i like the nostalgia in this
    wrt rights: photographic Dada interesting argument, but it don't hold much water with me.
    sharing imagery token by others is great -- but i don't think it's the point of this forum; it's great for a personal blog though

Hello, Moeti.

You have to be logged in or registered to leave your mark.

hello (at) 75.co.za