You may all applaud the Op but I still see it as a copy of someone else's work. It is borderline as far as law is concerned but why applaud a copy? Photographing the TV set is not real photography it is copy work and any copy shop could do it.. Chasing an animal 4 hours around a lake to get a great shot and then make the shot yours is photography. Anything else is imitation photography.
? ? ? TV set ? ? ? Did I miss something here, or is your vivid imagination filling in missing information that only you are privy to? I think the OP captured the video how is that so difficult to understand?
? ? ? TV set ? ? ? Did I miss something here, or is your vivid imagination filling in missing information that only you are privy to? I think the OP captured the video how is that so difficult to understand?
Too often forgotten here is the fact that copying anyone's work is not to be applauded but it seems to be applauded by most on here. I find it is not art or proper photography if you have to copy another's work. The Op did just that copy anther's work and claimed the shot as his shot. I ask only why should anyone tell him it was a good shot when it contained another's work? I have worked in video and have worked in photography and like all pro's I deplore people who copy another's work. This shot is clearly just a still copy out of a video that was the work of other people. I know how much work goes into making video and great photography I only want to see original work not copy work. Is that hard to understand? I do not think so. I think the OP needed to show something original and not a copy.
Too often forgotten here is the fact that copying anyone's work is not to be applauded but it seems to be applauded by most on here. I find it is not art or proper photography if you have to copy another's work. The Op did just that copy anther's work and claimed the shot as his shot. I ask only why should anyone tell him it was a good shot when it contained another's work? I have worked in video and have worked in photography and like all pro's I deplore people who copy another's work. This shot is clearly just a still copy out of a video that was the work of other people. I know how much work goes into making video and great photography I only want to see original work not copy work. Is that hard to understand? I do not think so. I think the OP needed to show something original and not a copy.
Too often forgotten here is the fact that copying ... (show quote)
How or where did you get the impression that the original video was the work of another person ??? I don't see that implied in the OP nor in any post other than your own. This is why I ask if you are privy to information not apparent to the rest of us? Is that simple question so hard to understand? If you have a valid reason to believe it was not the OP's work, then share it with us! Otherwise it seems you are jumping to false conclusions.
You may all applaud the Op but I still see it as a copy of someone else's work. It is borderline as far as law is concerned but why applaud a copy? Photographing the TV set is not real photography it is copy work and any copy shop could do it.. Chasing an animal 4 hours around a lake to get a great shot and then make the shot yours is photography. Anything else is imitation photography.
I took this photo at a beach near my house. I used a Sony rx100 camera in movie mode, and grabbed one frame from my own mp4 file. Doug Johnson, K7DJJ
I took this frame from a mp4 file taken today in my yard. No photoshop so it does not look copied.
Sorry but this info should have been in the original post. So many times I have been asked to copy other work that I immediately think of copy as copying other's work. I still stand by the fact that no one should copy other people's work. I have done restoration work and when I find a name on it I try to always find the originator of the work and do make those phone calls to see if the work can be gotten from the originator.