 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 82
Threadstarter
In this article from 2016 (when she won APPA Professional Photographer of the Year) she is quoted as saying "Every image has been photographed, so all the little elements I've gone out and photographed, and then I've combined them into Photoshop and so they look probably more like photo illustrations."
it was her win as Photographer of the Year at that time that got Ken Duncan all riled up : https://www.facebook.com/kenduncanph...3702019366433/
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
Threadstarter
Petapixel have picked up the story: https://petapixel.com/2019/02/13/awa...ealing-photos/
The tangled web of photo manipulation.
The age of entitlement isn't over, it's just over there where you can't get to it.
When several possibilities exist, the simplest solution is the best.
"There are no rules" Bruce Barnbaum, The art of Photography
Graham
Threadstarter
http://www.capturemag.com.au/latest/...ards-the-appas
AIPP have disqualified one winning photo so far
Shit will hit the fan big time.
Interesting..
But re-reading the 2016 article where Ken Duncan was complaining about photo manipulation to this extent being legitimate "Photography" it mentioned she'd published a book of images using a $20k gofundme account. She also had the subsequent book for sale for $195.00 each, and prints for upwards of $2500. I wonder what those owners might be thinking about now
Threadstarter
She has also sold prints for $15k and more. The fallout from this is going to v go on for months.Originally Posted by Boo53
$15k !!!!!, no wonder Ken Duncan is not a fan
She needed crowd funding ?
Constructive critique of my photos is welcome and appreciated.
Threadstarter
She has deleted her entire facebook presence. Her business and personal pages are all gone. Her website is still up at this time
http://www.lisasaad.com/
her instagram is still up: https://www.instagram.com/lisasaad/?hl=en
I am guessing we will see all her brand links disappear as the companies pull out of supporting her shortly. Lisa lists herself as a brand ambassador for brand ambassador for Manfrotto, Epson, Phottix, Tamron and Eizo.
Her studio site is still up: https://www.gothamstudios.net/
Bit of a long read.......
I am writing to advise you of the findings of the AIPP Awards Committee and independent specialist advice into the alleged breaches of entry rules, including alleged plagiarism, by Lisa Saad into the AIPP 2018 APPA Awards.
The AIPP became aware of rumours just over two weeks ago and sighted public accusations on Monday 4th February. We issued a media release on February 5th to indicate we would take the time to fully investigate the matter in the interests of due process and fairness to all. We advised you as members early this week.
The Institute also instructed Legal Counsel with a view to advising on several aspects of the allegations. The Board also appointed independent experts to advise us on potential rules breaches. The Awards Committee sought RAW files from Lisa Saad. It also made various enquiries about certain aspects and inconsistencies that were not self-evident from information provided.
As a result, regrettably, the image in question, submitted in the Commercial category of the AIPP Australian Professional Photography Awards in 2018, has now been disqualified, for breaches of rules of entry that have only now become apparent. Those rules include, amongst others:
· that all elements of an entry must be the work of the entrant;
· that "the use of third-party imagery such as stock photography ... is prohibited";
· that "Entries that have been plagiarised, either knowingly or subconsciously, will be disqualified";
· that digital manipulation is allowed ... but not to create new elements; and
· that, in the case of composites and digital manipulation, all entrants must be able to supply a copy or proof of each element used to create the final image (and that failure to provide such proof may result in disqualification).
As many members will be aware further allegations have been made in the public arena in relation to earlier State and National entries dating back several years. Those are now undergoing similar detailed study and analysis for compliance with rules of entry. The Awards Committee has further images being reassessed. Time is needed to complete that work.
The AIPP Board is very conscious that many members will have had Lisa as a Judge of their prints in the Awards. Some people may also have lost out with otherwise winning images in various categories, in relation to the images now additionally being reviewed. All of this is being considered along with the ramifications for prizes. As before, once the re-assessment has occurred members will be advised along with specific actions resulting from that. The further investigation is well advanced and new RAW files have been requested.
The AIPP has also communicated with fellow organisations around the world also grappling with similar issues, including New Zealand. The ramifications are significant. One immediate action is that the AIPP will be proposing to these same bodies a joint taskforce to review rules and entry criteria for images involving digital illustration, to recommend a new worldwide standard from the overarching national professional bodies to prevent future occurrences of this nature.
We are committed to fairness and due process. We have been criticised for taking time to carry out the investigation. But with so much riding on a correct view, including the reputations of our Awards, the photographers, the AIPP itself and those directly affected by judging and results, we had to be completely sure of the correct outcome for all parties.
We ask for your continued patience to ensure once again that the correct assessment is made on the added images being reassessed.
We have communicated with Lisa Saad the disqualification of the 2018 image. Naturally the impact on her is significant and is highly regrettable. Her friends will be a vital part in her continued wellbeing, which remains a key concern, not-withstanding the adverse findings. We will not be opening this matter up for discussion in the AIPP Community Facebook Page until the investigation is complete. We also encourage members to refrain from adverse comment in this matter elsewhere in social media. Of course, emotions will be very intense. But please remember! Many people more than just the two photographers in this specific matter are affected. The emotional impact is very challenging and painful and will vary, so please choose words carefully. Once the AIPP investigation is complete we will open up moderated discussion within our own Facebook community page.
We are advising the photo media of the outcome today, as well as AIPP Trade Partners and Sponsors.
John Swainston, National President
14 February 2019
Last edited by paulheath; 14-02-2019 at 7:31pm.
Threadstarter
...· that "Entries that have been plagiarised, either knowingly or subconsciously, will be disqualified";
How do you subconsciously steal someone else's work?.. over and over with different people's work.
I am looking forward to reading a statement directly from Lisa about all this.
Over and over is a bit of a stretch, but it's surprisingly common that artists unknowingly repeat work they've seen then forgotten about.
Not that that seems to be the case here, but you can see why they'd phrase their opinions cautiously.
Threadstarter
re the over and over.. They are now investigating her work back to 2009 that have other people's work embedded in them. So over and over it is. Have a read of the photo stealers post (in my very first post in this thread) it is not about copying others ideas and concepts, but about taking others work (downloading it), and placing that work into her own images.
Have a read of the story about the Bonsia.. she told everyone that the bonsai belonged to her recently deceased mother and she added it to her heart image as it had such meaning to her personally. But the bonsai photo has now been found to belong to another photographer, she downloaded it and added it to her construct. It never had any special meaning to her.
Lisa talks about her heart image and the bonsai : http://www.lisasaad.com/lisasaadphot...us-man-series/
And here is the same bonsai.. as taken by the original photographer: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/3505817487
So over and over she stole other people's work and lied about it being her own.
I understand that they need to display a certain level of sensitivity at this particular time ... but SERIOUSLY!!??.... We have communicated with Lisa Saad the disqualification of the 2018 image. Naturally the impact on her is significant and is highly regrettable. Her friends will be a vital part in her continued wellbeing, which remains a key concern, not-withstanding the adverse findings. We will not be opening this matter up for discussion in the AIPP Community Facebook Page until the investigation is complete. We also encourage members to refrain from adverse comment in this matter elsewhere in social media. Of course, emotions will be very intense. But please remember! Many people more than just the two photographers in this specific matter are affected. The emotional impact is very challenging and painful and will vary, so please choose words carefully....
Are we supposed to feel sympathy for a blatant 'cheat'.
What, because she's a high profile pro photog, that the rules don't apply to her!
I'm curious as to how much sympathy she displayed towards the entries immediately behind hers, and how they felt after the awards were announced.
Imagine some up and coming, non pro, trying to make it into the pro world. Those awards can make or break a career!
I'm thinking(first thing I thought of!!) was what about the poor souls that lost out, having followed the rules!!
This is where my sympathies lie.
Not with the fragile state of someone who clearly understood the risks involved in trying to bypass the system, because they somehow feel that they're entitled.
No way! .. she's obviously done the wrong thing, now accept it, harden up and cop the flack that inevitably comes with it.
First things first is that she needs to display a strong level of respect for the others that she's done wrong by, and by that I mean apologise for relegating those other entrants and having robbed them of their rightful places!
Until she's capable of showing some respect towards those more deserving folks, that must surely have all done the hard work to achieve what they did .. LS should be shown zero sympathy from the rest of us.
It's not like she accidentally did this, which would be a totally different situation.
SHE deliberately flouted the rules, so there's intent in her work. You can't accidentally add commercial clip art, and other peoples art into your own work.
No sympathy!!
Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
{Nikon}; -> 50/1.2 : 500/8 : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8 ais : 105mm f/1.8 ais : 24mm/2 ais
{Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
{Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC
{Yongnuo}; -> YN35/2N : YN50/1.8N
Fascinating stuff.
I believe that largely, our thoughts precede our actions, unless when running from a hungry predator then instincts kick in, no time to think.
All my life I have access to thoughts in my head/mind/consciousness; where they come from, where they live, what they are and how I get them (are they mine as opposed to someone else’s?) still eludes me. Generally, I believe that these thoughts have been influenced by my parents, teachers and the western Christian culture in which I was raised (although I am not a Christian).
So where does this slippery slope to our undoing begin?
Do we have a desperate need to be recognised and so cheat just “a little” to suddenly find that we have “won” and are now the centre of attention?
Having now tasted this addictive ego-massage by breaching the written and unwritten rules once, are the rewards so fabulous and ego needs so great that we now do it again, and again, and again, digging a deeper hole each time.
At some point, do we throw caution to the winds and simply not even consider that we are cheating as the intoxication of fame is so overwhelmingly pursued. I recall seeing this same scenario unfold when Lance Armstrong admitted he was a drug cheat, yet was still excusing himself, somehow justifying his actions. It seems that the mind can generate an “alternate reality” to that perceived by most “normal” folks.
The human mind is indeed a strange place, I am glad that I am boringly “normal”.
Cheers
Dennis
Last edited by nardes; 15-02-2019 at 12:05pm.
Dennis
I'm going to go out on a limb here .......
I accept totally that she has done the wrong thing - multiple times - and she is going to pay a very heavy price for what she's done. It's not dissimilar to that girl who claimed to have cancer and wrote books about "cures".
However, I am also very conscious of the mental toll that this will bring, and how people in similar situations have been driven to suicide by the overwhelming pressure of social media and public humiliation. I, for one, would not want to contribute to that and feel that my comments lead to that sort of demise.
She will lose her entire photographic life over this, her livelihood, her reputation and her self respect. I would not want her to lose her life as well.
She has been tried in the court of public opinion; she is guilty as sin - but let's tread carefully lest we become part of a global swell that could just push her over the edge.
"If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” — Jim Richardson
Entirely agree Bob.
But, if there's one aspect that the world shows us time and again, is that devious minded folks, generally remain deviously minded.
There's also no way to know for sure, that any real remorse she may display is going to be genuine or not.
Her issue now, is that she's going to have a very hard time trying to convince people that she's going to be genuinely affected by her actions.
And like I said before, if she truly had any real remorse, she'd have apologised immediately once found out, knowing full well that she couldn't supply the requirements that AIPP would have demanded.
She would have done this way earlier than the demand from AIPP for files, and whatnot.
Surely she would have realised what she was doing ... I can't fathom someone of her experience not being fully aware of what she was doing.
.. so, maybe I'm a bit more sceptical than normal(or mistrustful), based on her past actions .. more importantly her inactions ... my personal opinion is that she will try to take advantage of the situation in some way.
I can't see her finding a silver lining anywhere here. I think she's basically screwed!
As Monty Python might have said .... "what a senseless waste of (professional) life!"
Threadstarter
The AIPP were made aware of this on the 4th February, before that, Marcel (https://www.facebook.com/MarcelvanBalken) had contacted her directly regarding her use of his photo in one of her award winning prints. She threatened to sue him. He took it to photostealers and then the AIPP. She then had her lawyers threaten photo stealers.
She would have known from the moment Marcel contacted her (sometime before the 4th Feb) that her fraud had been detected. Yet rather than admit it, she got the lawyers onto everyone.
Once it started to gain traction, she began deleting photos from her facebook. instagram etc. Photos that she knew would provide additional proof of what she had done. Did she really think she could legally threaten people to keep the truth hidden?
It is now 11 days since the AIPP began their investigation. And from the releases it seems she has not even admitted to the AIPP that she has done this.
She has not apologised to Marcel (I asked him this morning), his only contact with her has been the letters from her lawyer, threatening him, and demanding payment..to her! The same for Corey from Photo Sleaters, Corey has not had anything beyond her demand that the posts etc be removed, and a sum of money was requested.
Whilst through all of this she damn well knew she had stolen others people's work. This tells us so much about her character.
She has had 11 days (at least) to come clean, but has not done so.
I think her actions since Marcel contacted her, tell us a lot about the person she is and the longer she goes before she provides a public apology (if she ever does), says more again about her character.
Sometimes it's just easier to fess up to our wrong doings than to try and cover it up, which in this case, she's just being silent, and that's not helping her case either.
Unfortunately turn of events but as bobt, hopefully doesn't go all the way south.
David Tran
Sony a55
Sony DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6
Now sits as an antique as it no longer focuses properly.
Wishlist: Sony RX10iv (or RX10v if it ever comes out)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
