Question About Girl With A Pearl Earring

I think Vermeer has been dead long enough that you're probably safe, Lisa.

I've done a few drawings copying the masters - I think that's considered ok.

Whew, thank goodness. Thank you Mary. I don't like copying any artist but I was being silly yesterday and painted a great many works all inspired by Johannes Vermeer. I wasn't thinking and my sister who is completely misunderstanding of infringement laws was going off on Facebook after a share of my silly practice works. For a moment I thought I hadn't read thousands of posts here on FAA about what is and isn't infringement.

May be one day when you get to the other side, Vermeer could wait with the papers to serve you 😆

That is a terrifying thought, Tony! LOL

Even though I have Dutch ancestry dating back (even) before the time of Vermeer, I can't see that as being any kind of infringement.
(I also do have an earring, but it's diamond, not pearl. LOL)



---------------
~ Bill
BillSwartwout.com

Maybe I should paint you, Bill. Is your image or picture copyrighted. Would your very image be a copyright infringement?

Ha-ha, Lisa. But I'm still alive and would give you permission - so no problem there.

We also live on opposite sides of the country - so we are also social distancing. Be safe.

Thank you, Bill. Tonight I'm practicing my portraiture painting on your image, so I don't get in trouble with my sister. Anyone else want to give me permission? I obviously need practice!

I'd listen to your sister.

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

Lisa , I dont have any rings on my ear or nose or any where, only ring I am familiar with are the nose rings for the bulls. 😊

Really David? Can you help us understand? I appreciate your views because I know you're a researcher on this topic and I also know that you have your work copyright protected.

David just email me. That way you don't have to suffer everyone's opinion if you wish.

Tony, LOL. I'll check that out.

Have you actually worked with dangerous bulls? I could never go near them.

Anything in the public domain is no longer protected by copyright laws. From what I understand, copyrights expire 75 years after the death of the artist. But it would be only fair to say "after so and so" in the title or at least in the description. I am working on a "After Monet" piece right now.

Yes Lisa, they could be dangerous, I was breeding Charlais pure bread and we select, bulls based on their progeny. We do check many data with that's shows the various attributes of the parents , most of mine was good and calm however with a bull you always want to be careful. That's why you put ring on the nose lol

About copying someone else's work.
I was told if you make a certain number of changes to your work it's O.K. Unfortunately I don't remember how many changes that is. The number 9 kind of sticks in my head.
Your painting definitely is not a copy of Vermeer's painting, so you are safe. Search "Girl With a Pearl Earring" here on FAA and see how many people have copied his work. There's a lot.
My Painting "Intrigued" is from the movie "Girl With the Pearl Earring", I too was concerned about doing a painting from a scene from that movie. I also have other ideas for paintings I would like to do from that movie. I'm looking forward to it. Where else are you going to get someone dressed in that period type wardrobe? The cinematography in that movie is wonderful.
As long as you are not making copies a trying to pass them off as originals, you shouldn't have a problem.

Lisa, I wouldn't take David too seriously since he bases much of his art on masterworks. If it is in the public domain you can make any changes you like. A rule of thumb is if an artist has been dead for 70 years in the US and most other countries you are OK. There are exceptions and some countries are different on their laws. Vermeer's work I wouldn't worry. The worst that can happen is someone who owns the painting asks you to take it down.

Bruce that is good advice. Thank you.

Tony, I'm afraid of all cows. Is that funny...seeing a mamma cow with horns is a terrifying site...especially once when I was in a field painting and one came up to me! That happened and I petted a cow but my heart was beating...I thought they would stay far away holy you know what!

Tara, thank you for chiming in. My painting certainly was never meant to be a copy, I was fooling around, but I'm not sure I'm safe. What if a museum owns a copyright of all things that look like A girl With a Pearl Earring? I was told or came to the same conclusion as you.

Duchamp added a mustache to the Mona Lisa and got away with it. I wonder if you shaved the mustache off of the Mona Lisa and said it was a spoof of Duchamp’s work if you could get away with it?

Thank you, Suzanne. Your words make perfect sense. I took it down not because of the laws or anything...but because one of the things my sister pointed out was that it's unethical to reinvent the masterpieces like I just did last night. I don't know how to feel about what she said, but it's much easier to do my own art. I found the attempt of working on a derivative work very challenging.

LOL, Ronald. That is right, forgot about that one. I would offer to put a moustache on your avatar, however it would be very difficult for me to get all the aspects of your composition down pat.

Master copies are done all the time. Most masterpieces of real recognition are too old to be copyrighted and are in the public domain.
Just don't copy the signature and claim it is an original. Now That's unethical, immoral, and a federal crime in the United States.
I've seen obscure art copied and pasted off as original ideas. In fact, there was this guy who used an old master etching as part of his background and photoshopped another image in the foreground. When this was pointed out, he claimed he had permission by the artist to use the old etching. I laughed my arse off cuz the artist of the etching had been dead for like 300 years!
What a liar! Let's just say, this lying sack of waste repeatedly tried to fool his audience with fake art and fake claims.
Once a liar, always a liar!

Thank you Drew. I get that copying any art is unethical and immoral and more so if you copy the signature and claim it's an original. I actually couldn't copy anyone's work including my own...I simply don't have that skill level. I have never considered copying a signature! But thank you for identifying even more clearly what infringement is as far as a masterpiece infringing. I remember a case where someone went to prison over such a crime. I think he's famous now, but forgot who it is.

Lisa, maybe your sister doesn't like your rendition of the painting. As I stated before, people make copies of that painting all the time, and some of them are quite good, or funny. I see that someone did my idea and painted Scarlett Johanssen as the model.

Lisa, your sister sounds like one of my brothers. Lol!. I say you are good to go and no infringement of any type and nothing what so ever unethical. Plus I like your version better. :-)

My..."Young Lady".....

https://bridburg.com/featured/young-lady-david-bridburg.html

cast in red......

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

Beautiful work, David. Is this legally safe to do without permission of some museum or the owner of the original work?

Thank you Mario.

Tara, I will check out your work.

Lisa,

If a photo of a masterwork is a faithful copy/photograph, the copy of a PD work is in the PD as well.

It is mine it is yours etc......but any changes I make are mine. Not your or anyone else's.

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

I found this on the internet since David won't answer my question. His work is completely legit.


https://www.cartoonbrew.com/law/beginners-guide-copyright-law-artists-153115.html?fbclid=IwAR0VKkNv8DVml8dWbpL7iSCAEmet5HPeqvuTD9NV7KZCjYsDsHZH3NAKzcM

Lisa your free to use any of my images for your practice painting. :-)

vermeer may have faked it


https://youtu.be/ZGMoVpjZuOY

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_obscura

The camera obscura has been known about for centuries.

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

Interesting documentary Drew.

Thanks Mario!

Lisa, your work is so different from the original that it has become your own original work.

"Homage refers to an act of showing respect or tribute towards someone or something in public. In the context of art, the term refers to a painting, movie or another work of art where the artist adopts the content or features of another artist or work as a mark of respect. "

Or you could call it a remix.

I have paid homage to Lisa K back in 2018 for inspiring a loose abstract method in my work at that time. I saw a great video of Lisa at work, and understood the technique would add a new set of works to my portfolio. One of the works is modeled off an image of hers. She very kindly allowed me to pay homage. Then two more works used a triangular set up of flowers Lisa has in one of her works, but were by my own hand and mouse.

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

https://bridburg.com/featured/fragile-david-bridburg.html

Lisa: "Thank you, Bill. Tonight I'm practicing my portraiture painting on your image,"

I would certainly be interested in seeing that - because I very much like your artistic interpretation(s).
(If you haven't gotten far yet - I would be happy to email you a larger image with which to work.)

Hi Lisa, You work is so original! Love it! Copyright laws expire 75 years after an artists death, so you are in the clear. So your work was inspired by
Vermeer's work, Girl With A Pearl Earring! It's gorgeous, and looks so different from his original. My brothers mother-in-law did an exact copy of
that piece and it doesn't look like Vermeer's work. I see her self-portrait instead. When doing portrait work every artist always puts a little of themselves in
the work, it usually ends up looking like them. LoL.

Also, look at how many times van Goghs', Starry Starry Night has been copied, redone in different ways! And he is more recent than Vermeer.

IMO, not unethical. Not even a little bit. And I love your interpretation!

Thank you all for your words of compassion and encouragement.

Edward, I had called it a remix...funny you used that term. I also use the term for piano music I compose.

Why are people so naive about what true infringement is vs creative works from public domain?

I know there have been many conversations on this and even arguments. I think what Drew said really nails what I could have said to my sis to prevent her confusion. She's not talking to me. Oh well, I do appreciate all of you.

Late to this fascinating discussion, LiSA. To me, only as to this artwork, because the subject is so fraught
, and, I don’t care, lol, about others’ possible infringements......I think your work stands on it’s own....inspired by the master,
now seen thru your heart , and without cause for concern about legalities. Certainly, Vermeer would be honoured !
You know that ‘after Vermeer’ would protect your intent.
But, your painting is YOUR work through and through, “im....ho”.

Lisa, your sister not talking to you?
There must be other under laying reasons, it can't be just for her understanding of infringement.
If she truly care about you, she should be talking try to understand the real infringement laws.
Sad , I hope she comes around and talk to you .
A little bit of jealousy could make one behave like that.

I've had the same reaction from someone who believes it's totally unethical to remove a dull, flat sky and replace it with a sky that enhances the scene. He calls it "flat-out cheating". Give me a break.

Thanks Vivian. I do remember some of your comments in the past and know how you feel on this subject...so honored that you like my art. I threw it away...so it's gone, and when I do this work again, it will be entitled: Man with a diamond earring. LOL


Tony, she will get over it. I think because she is very intellignet, she cannot handle being wrong. She is actually an awesome patron and has bought some of my my most expensive works. She will hang on to her opinion like a ball and chain until the end of time. On that note, she may have helped me on some level to stay in my own lane of creativity and not use public domain works. I've done it before with Jackson Pollock concepts but none of that went over well in my art shows.

Kathleen, I have had more artists than you can imagine say to me this, "Digital art isn't art." I am floored by the perspective enough to the point that I won't even engage in that "stoopid stoopid stoopid" conversation. I got my start in digital art and my highest sale ever was selling all rights to a file image to the film industry. I cannot even possibly understand a person who would say that digital art isn't art...because it's the highest paying art job out there! LAMO

Anyhow, I cannot help the naïve peeps out there. There are many villages in the art world. Some of my local peeps simply don't understand how many of the most beautiful images are created and I prefer that they don't know now. Some things are insider intel.

All that said, I have gotten away from digital images as of late. I'm working on about 800 paintings in my own style that I plan on having copyrighted through the U.S. copyright office if I ever finish these works. It takes me 1 of 10 works that only kind of makes the grade. I am hoping to practice enough so that I get much better than I am at the present time. My present goal is 100 per year over the next 8 years. It's a lot of work and I've gotten away from even posting them here on fineartamerica.

Genevieve, wow and thank you for posting. Your art career is so amazing and I'm following you a lot these days. Love all your work and projects...I do not know how you work as hard as you do. I know that's off topic. The self portraiture thing is very interesting, really is. (When doing portrait work every artist always puts a little of themselves in
the work, it usually ends up looking like them. LoL. Genevieve Esson)

Man with a diamond earring. LOL

LOL for sure.

BTW - I just left a comment on your recent "Morning Light." Outstanding.

Kathleen,

I have never trusted the morality police.

Dave Bridburg
Bridburg.com
Post Modern Gallery

LIsa, don't stress the sis not talking to you, my older brother is also not taking to me and I don't even know why? maybe it's the meds he is taking, I forgive him, I think it might just be sibling rivalry?

Thank you, Mario and Bill.

David, I never quite trust the morality police either...I'm using that one. I don't like my thoughts and ideas policed at all.

Lisa,
I made a comment on one of your paintings
As soon as I look at that painting, these lines came to my mind just out of the blue , and so I put that on the comments.
I am not a poet but these lines goes well with that paining.

The spring is coming
The leaves are sprouting
The birds are singing
The snow is melting
I am waiting to get out with shouting.
(Writing this from my hotel room during the COVID 19 lockdown in Cali, Colombia)

Very cool poem, Tony.

Lisa, Just saw this. I love your interpretation of the painting! I like that you have faced her the opposite direction of the original. Am sorry to see she doesn't appear with your work.

Lisa, Why did you throw the work away? Oh no! It's amazing! A genius work of art. It is your own creation and original artwork. I would have liked to see it
as well on your FAA portfolio. Sorry to hear about the rivalry between you and your sister. I have two older sisters and we are only a year apart and totally different
from each other. I always looked up to them and their opinions when I was younger, but not so much anymore. People change. Hopefully your sister will too.
She sounds a bit opinionated and maybe a bit envious of your remarkable talent. People in general, can be a bit off with artists. It is because we have the guts
to express ourselves and put it out there. A lot of it comes from their own insecurities about themselves. Whatever it is, it is not you. Keep up the great work. Please
take your masterpiece out of the trash and put it online. It's really cool! In awe of your talent! Stay well!

Thanks Lisa 🙏

Ok, Genevieve, I will do it.

I don't think it's envy, but I don't know how many naïve people my sister can convince that I'm unethical for using public domain work...actually I was working from memory so I didn't even have a reference photo and I wasn't even trying to copy, my intention was creative... so the attack on Facebook came as a complete surprise and it's really hard as an artist to defend your work once the attacks start. Whether it has to do with envy, or whatever, it doesn't matter, one attack can lead to others and then you're under siege. I find it much easier just to move on and delete conversations and/or controversial art.

I rarely work from a photo, my art is quick and spontaneous and so much easier than working from photos and other artist's endeavors. Most of my art is actually junk and a few works make to the framing process and into the gallery.

As a digital artist since 2014 I have had to defend my art many times over and I know all of you have done the same. I also was so impressed by the responses here!

So thank you all for that.

You know what's funny as a painter, I've had to defend my paintings too. Recently the owner of my gallery thought one of paintings was a print. It was a painting of a flamingo...so weird.

The law worldwide seems to be that an artist/author/sculptor/painter/photographer/composer etc etc can not retain copyright on their work once they are 70 years gone from this world.

I suspect that Vermeer has multiples of 70 years from his final decline? Although his work lives on as powerful as ever!

Great point Jack and wouldn't we all love that if that was us after we pass?

For once, as a personal reply., NO,..I don’t care about once I’m gone. Burn it all. Still !! No-one will know, incl moi.

However Jack,
If the artist give all his or her work as an asset to an incorporated company and then did the copyright protectection under that business then all his work will remain copyright protected forever under that business.
That corporation will be the owner of those works and those are assets of the corporation.

I feel the same way Vivian, so much so that I haul loads of freight to the Goodwill, businesses that will take my art, and of course the dumpster nearly every month.

The times I do sell a lot of work, it doesn't add up to much and all of it, (the $) has to be paid to the IRS at the end of the year. I had a 6K tax bill this year even after I had money taken out of every check...so I am no longer hungry and I am asking myself, what on earth am I doing this for?

It's been months since I've produced a decent digital work, but I do enjoy FAA as a repository for many of my works and I love my fellow artists.

Tony, are you talking about a rights managed contract?

No Lisa,
I am talking about giving ownership of all the work to an incorporated company. The artist is still hold all the shares of the corporation. Then the company can do the copy right , licensing and right managed or every other option just like you or me as a person, only major differences is that the corporation doesn't die it could only go bankrupt.
One can sale the company shares or pass it on to children etc. But the artworks are assets of the company and all the copyright on them are with the company and it doesn't end when the artist die.
Any more about how to setup and run an Incorporated company is something you may need to talk to a professional Lawyer or accountant.
I shouldn't give any more advise on that.
-- I am not a lawyer , I had lawyers on my payroll in the past and now a young girl in my family is a corporate lawyer at age 24 in Canada and I am very proud of her.
That is as far as I got close to the lawyers. Lol

LOL Tony. I was raised by an attorney and all he taught me was to stay clear of a court room.

Thank you everyone. This discussion has come to a closing. Peace, love and success to you all!