Ryan Dungey drawing .

PRM31
Posts
3594
Joined
8/7/2009
Location
Northern, VA US
Fantasy
12/7/2018 5:28pm
And using photoshop I could make it look like a drawing in a couple minutes. Still looks cool either way.
1
5
Beeby
Posts
2064
Joined
9/3/2009
Location
Chicago, IL US
12/7/2018 5:34pm
Is it a free hand drawing or is the basis a tracing? If it’s a free hand totally whilst looking at a photo then that’s one thing, same as someone sketching a painting in a museum. If it’s traced i feel like it’s a reproduction without permission.
stillwelding
Posts
3235
Joined
1/22/2007
Location
Santa Clarita, CA US
12/7/2018 5:39pm
cudby wrote:
Copied from my photo Dry
Looks better than your photo, I’m afraid.
7
3
krypto71
Posts
105
Joined
8/15/2014
Location
AU
12/7/2018 5:39pm
cudby wrote:
All I said is it’s my photo. That’s all.
Take a hike Cudby
GuyB wrote:
...and...you can take a break from posting. Have a smidge of respect. Anonymity makes for "brave" posters. I'm actually not sure that the Dungey photo's not...
...and...you can take a break from posting. Have a smidge of respect.

Anonymity makes for "brave" posters.

I'm actually not sure that the Dungey photo's not mine, but I understand Simon's frustration with people poaching copyrighted materials for whatever purpose, especially without asking.

As an example, there's a company that sells t-shirts, that has a network of Instagram accounts that poach photos of mine all the time. If I ask them to remove them, it's nothing but crickets.
I get that but Brian is hardly doing that now is he? He has spent hours hand creating an awesome piece of artwork using your image as inspiration. Now if he had blown up your photo and is attempting to pass it off as his own well to me that would be a different story. Be flattered that he has used your awesome photo as inspiration... And as for asking permission, is your name on the photo anywhere or should he just know who took it? Ironic that neither of you sound 100% sure who owns the copyright...
14

The Shop

akillerwombat
Posts
3211
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
12/7/2018 5:42pm
krypto71 wrote:
I get that but Brian is hardly doing that now is he? He has spent hours hand creating an awesome piece of artwork using your image...
I get that but Brian is hardly doing that now is he? He has spent hours hand creating an awesome piece of artwork using your image as inspiration. Now if he had blown up your photo and is attempting to pass it off as his own well to me that would be a different story. Be flattered that he has used your awesome photo as inspiration... And as for asking permission, is your name on the photo anywhere or should he just know who took it? Ironic that neither of you sound 100% sure who owns the copyright...
Anyone who has spent more than a second in the art world knows full well you take a risk when replicating someone else's material... regardless of a change in medium.
krypto71
Posts
105
Joined
8/15/2014
Location
AU
12/7/2018 5:47pm
Again, I get that but seriously in this instance is it that important given we are talking about a guy who is part of the vital family? Geez...
1
billyp330
Posts
414
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
Dorset, OH US
12/7/2018 6:02pm
Take a hike Cudby
GuyB wrote:
...and...you can take a break from posting. Have a smidge of respect. Anonymity makes for "brave" posters. I'm actually not sure that the Dungey photo's not...
...and...you can take a break from posting. Have a smidge of respect.

Anonymity makes for "brave" posters.

I'm actually not sure that the Dungey photo's not mine, but I understand Simon's frustration with people poaching copyrighted materials for whatever purpose, especially without asking.

As an example, there's a company that sells t-shirts, that has a network of Instagram accounts that poach photos of mine all the time. If I ask them to remove them, it's nothing but crickets.
krypto71 wrote:
I get that but Brian is hardly doing that now is he? He has spent hours hand creating an awesome piece of artwork using your image...
I get that but Brian is hardly doing that now is he? He has spent hours hand creating an awesome piece of artwork using your image as inspiration. Now if he had blown up your photo and is attempting to pass it off as his own well to me that would be a different story. Be flattered that he has used your awesome photo as inspiration... And as for asking permission, is your name on the photo anywhere or should he just know who took it? Ironic that neither of you sound 100% sure who owns the copyright...
They would know whom exactly took it if it actually took them hours to produce and not just a quick press of a button... Not trying to bash either of them as they take great pictures but lets be real. If you cant even distinguish your own work from someone elses then you didnt really work to make it. I dont understand how you could call someone out for “copying” your work when come to find out you dont even know that it was in fact yours.
6
3
akillerwombat
Posts
3211
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
12/7/2018 6:04pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 6:09pm
krypto71 wrote:
Again, I get that but seriously in this instance is it that important given we are talking about a guy who is part of the vital...
Again, I get that but seriously in this instance is it that important given we are talking about a guy who is part of the vital family? Geez...
We're talking about a guy (who yes is part of the family) is attempting / making money off the work of other members(s) of the vital family.

In the grand scheme of things, is it a huge deal, no... it's a single commission for a single client but brimx153 knows the risk (or he does now) of using other peoples work as such an obvious building block for his work. Every artist has done it at least once and gotten caught for it at least once, myself included.

I'm sure a simple email to Cudby or GuyB would have gone a long way.
2
3
billyp330
Posts
414
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
Dorset, OH US
12/7/2018 6:14pm
krypto71 wrote:
Again, I get that but seriously in this instance is it that important given we are talking about a guy who is part of the vital...
Again, I get that but seriously in this instance is it that important given we are talking about a guy who is part of the vital family? Geez...
We're talking about a guy ([i]who yes is part of the family[/i]) is attempting / making money off the work of other members(s) of the vital...
We're talking about a guy (who yes is part of the family) is attempting / making money off the work of other members(s) of the vital family.

In the grand scheme of things, is it a huge deal, no... it's a single commission for a single client but brimx153 knows the risk (or he does now) of using other peoples work as such an obvious building block for his work. Every artist has done it at least once and gotten caught for it at least once, myself included.

I'm sure a simple email to Cudby or GuyB would have gone a long way.
He isnt making money off of their work. Even if he traced it, he still had to take the time to lay it all out and carefully do it to make it look that good. They all ready got paid for their work when it made it onto the website or magazine so why is it a problem for him to take it from the mag or site and put his work into it and try to make money off of it as well? How is that hurting them? If They think they deserve the money for him doing that then why dont they do that themselves?
1
akillerwombat
Posts
3211
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
12/7/2018 6:20pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 6:24pm
billyp330 wrote:
He isnt making money off of their work. Even if he traced it, he still had to take the time to lay it all out and...
He isnt making money off of their work. Even if he traced it, he still had to take the time to lay it all out and carefully do it to make it look that good. They all ready got paid for their work when it made it onto the website or magazine so why is it a problem for him to take it from the mag or site and put his work into it and try to make money off of it as well? How is that hurting them? If They think they deserve the money for him doing that then why dont they do that themselves?
I really have no desire to get into it with someone who clearly has no understanding nor experience of any kind in this subject.

If you really care about the issue there are countless articles written about it on the internet... but if you're more of a visual guy you can watch the documentary "Obey Giant" which is all about how Shepard Fairey did this with the Obama "Hope" posters.

Educate yourself, then come back, and we'll have a discussion to fill in any questions you may have.
1
2
toroP
Posts
4483
Joined
4/6/2009
Location
Cincinnati, OH US
12/7/2018 6:30pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 8:09pm
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without permission. And I bet Simon/GuyB would have been cool with it, as long as credits given.
2
2
billyp330
Posts
414
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
Dorset, OH US
12/7/2018 6:43pm
billyp330 wrote:
He isnt making money off of their work. Even if he traced it, he still had to take the time to lay it all out and...
He isnt making money off of their work. Even if he traced it, he still had to take the time to lay it all out and carefully do it to make it look that good. They all ready got paid for their work when it made it onto the website or magazine so why is it a problem for him to take it from the mag or site and put his work into it and try to make money off of it as well? How is that hurting them? If They think they deserve the money for him doing that then why dont they do that themselves?
I really have no desire to get into it with someone who clearly has no understanding nor experience of any kind in this subject. If you...
I really have no desire to get into it with someone who clearly has no understanding nor experience of any kind in this subject.

If you really care about the issue there are countless articles written about it on the internet... but if you're more of a visual guy you can watch the documentary "Obey Giant" which is all about how Shepard Fairey did this with the Obama "Hope" posters.

Educate yourself, then come back, and we'll have a discussion to fill in any questions you may have.
You think that because of one case where someone sued and won (which is undisclosed of what they actually settled for so for all we know it was nothing, all we do know is he was fined and charged due to his tampering with evidence, a completely different issue) that makes it clear that its wrong? Its a very controversial gray area in both law and morals. I see it as he isnt hurting them in anyway and he did have to put work of his own into it (and in this case, much more work then what whomever the actual photographer did) so why is it a problem? Dont agree with it thats fine, don’t buy it. To declare that he can’t sell it becuase of your own feelings on the topic is ignorant.
billyp330
Posts
414
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
Dorset, OH US
12/7/2018 6:48pm
toroP wrote:
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without...
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without permission. And I bet Simon/GuyB would have been cool with it, as long as credits given.
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster having the MEC to begin with. Did they pay either of them for the rights? Also, the same shot was aired on FOX Sports so he didnt need the picture to create that drawing.
12
akillerwombat
Posts
3211
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
12/7/2018 6:56pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 6:59pm
billyp330 wrote:
You think that because of one case where someone sued and won (which is undisclosed of what they actually settled for so for all we know...
You think that because of one case where someone sued and won (which is undisclosed of what they actually settled for so for all we know it was nothing, all we do know is he was fined and charged due to his tampering with evidence, a completely different issue) that makes it clear that its wrong? Its a very controversial gray area in both law and morals. I see it as he isnt hurting them in anyway and he did have to put work of his own into it (and in this case, much more work then what whomever the actual photographer did) so why is it a problem? Dont agree with it thats fine, don’t buy it. To declare that he can’t sell it becuase of your own feelings on the topic is ignorant.
Nah dude, it's not a gray area in morals or law... hence how there are laws to protect the photographer in this case.

But what do I know, I've only been working as an artist for 15+ years, went to school for it, had classes on art law and ethics (this topic is literally a day one lecture), been involved in legal cases around shit like this via various ad agencies, etc.

Have a good one.
6
billyp330
Posts
414
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
Dorset, OH US
12/7/2018 7:16pm
billyp330 wrote:
You think that because of one case where someone sued and won (which is undisclosed of what they actually settled for so for all we know...
You think that because of one case where someone sued and won (which is undisclosed of what they actually settled for so for all we know it was nothing, all we do know is he was fined and charged due to his tampering with evidence, a completely different issue) that makes it clear that its wrong? Its a very controversial gray area in both law and morals. I see it as he isnt hurting them in anyway and he did have to put work of his own into it (and in this case, much more work then what whomever the actual photographer did) so why is it a problem? Dont agree with it thats fine, don’t buy it. To declare that he can’t sell it becuase of your own feelings on the topic is ignorant.
Nah dude, it's not a gray area in morals or law... hence how there are laws to protect the photographer in this case. But what do...
Nah dude, it's not a gray area in morals or law... hence how there are laws to protect the photographer in this case.

But what do I know, I've only been working as an artist for 15+ years, went to school for it, had classes on art law and ethics (this topic is literally a day one lecture), been involved in legal cases around shit like this via various ad agencies, etc.

Have a good one.
I too have had classes on law and ethics, not for art, but for patents as I am an Engineer. Its not so black and white as you are stating it is. It is in fact a gray area in most cases as there have been lawsuits won and lost on the same topic. Each instance is unique and has to be examined independently. Again, I ask what is the harm of this artist selling that specific piece of art that he painted based upon someones photograph?
4
Gale19XX
Posts
341
Joined
11/9/2014
Location
Dubuque, IA US
12/7/2018 7:35pm
Not to throw a wrench into this argument but I’m actually not sure this photo isn’t mine.
28
mx196
Posts
539
Joined
2/7/2011
Location
MA US
12/7/2018 7:40pm
cudby wrote:
All I said is it’s my photo. That’s all.
So if you take a picture of a mountain at a specific angle am I not allowed to draw a picture of that same mountain at that same angle?

This kid drew a picture of an iconic moment in moto and at the end of the day many people captured that photo and it was also on tv. Granted it is the same angle of the photograph you took and quite possibly it is an interpretation of your photo, but at the end of the day he hand drew it and it isn’t exactly like your photograph. If it was he would have just made a photo copy not in color.

I would imagine somebody with a portfolio as large as yourself with a professional background as rich as yourself wouldn’t need to take claim of I’m guessing a 19 year olds drawing? I’m assuming I’m wrong. Times are tough apparently.

Keep up the drawing kid those are sick.
12
1
brimx153
Posts
3344
Joined
5/3/2012
Location
IE
12/7/2018 7:55pm
First off the drawing is entirely free hand . I took the picture off goggle images , there was no name of who took it , or watermark or copywrite on it . Some have suggested I should have sent guy b or cuby an e mail to ask permission. Well I had no clue who took the photo so that was nt an option . I did the drawing last year , it s of something that happen over 5 years ago so I did nt think anyone would be too concerned about it either way. I'll say this again it s rare I do drawing of motocross. It not like it's my full time job and I making Tons of money off it . Plus any money I do get would be going straight back into the sport anyway (I even offered to swop it for bike parts ) . Plus I was selling the drawing its self ,there were no copies of it .

Guy b if it not comfortable with it u can just tell me and I will delete the thread and bin the drawing ,no hard feeling s

The drawing is not the exact same as the photo . I always use artistic licence in drawing s , mostly in backgrounds ,

Akillerwombat , comparing my drawing to the hope pictures is wrong, imo. That was stealing an idea which imo is different . If you talking law . All that would happen is the photographer could try sue me . The judge would ask did I copy it from this photo . I will say No , point out the artistic differences and tell them to prove I coppied it .which they can t ( even cuby was getting confused on who took it ) that would be the end of story .
I am not that type of person , I have mad respect for cuby and guy b , that s why I have been full honest where I got the photo . But I do think I could of just said , I did not use ur pic , and prove it .
20
500guy
Posts
12469
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
AZ US
12/7/2018 8:04pm
I already printed the drawing out , took a photo of it and now plan to sell copies that are digitally printed by walmart. ha ha ha
10
brimx153
Posts
3344
Joined
5/3/2012
Location
IE
12/7/2018 8:08pm
Nah dude, it's not a gray area in morals or law... hence how there are laws to protect the photographer in this case. But what do...
Nah dude, it's not a gray area in morals or law... hence how there are laws to protect the photographer in this case.

But what do I know, I've only been working as an artist for 15+ years, went to school for it, had classes on art law and ethics (this topic is literally a day one lecture), been involved in legal cases around shit like this via various ad agencies, etc.

Have a good one.
I went to art college to , and never did they bring up laws . I am sure they did for graphic design and product design . But for fine arts thats not something they ever brought up. But I have never done a drawing off a copywrite photo or would never
jeffro503
Posts
27632
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR US
12/7/2018 8:14pm
cudby wrote:
All I said is it’s my photo. That’s all.
Always , always , always been a fan of your photo's man. I mean , a serious fan that has gone back years in awe looking at some of the stuff you have shot. Will always be a fan as well. With that being said......if it was my pic , I would be honored that someone took multiple hours to do a drawing of it.

I've actually never really thought of a drawing of a famous picture , and what that might mean in the copyright rules and so forth. I mean , it's not a copy by any means , but a drawing , so it's literally 100% different.....right? That question is for anyone btw.
toroP
Posts
4483
Joined
4/6/2009
Location
Cincinnati, OH US
12/7/2018 8:26pm
toroP wrote:
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without...
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without permission. And I bet Simon/GuyB would have been cool with it, as long as credits given.
billyp330 wrote:
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster...
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster having the MEC to begin with. Did they pay either of them for the rights? Also, the same shot was aired on FOX Sports so he didnt need the picture to create that drawing.
So, just anyone can be on the track taking photos? No. Who gets to? What are the rules? Image rights? .....
And he didn’t use video footage, he used a unique photo. I bet he carefully chose that photo for its quality. And jeez, it’s just common courtesy, to get permission to use, and to acknowledge, someone else’s work.
1
2
jeffro503
Posts
27632
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR US
12/7/2018 8:30pm
toroP wrote:
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without...
The drawing would not exist without the original art, the photo. It’s wrong to copy someone else’s art then try to make money from it without permission. And I bet Simon/GuyB would have been cool with it, as long as credits given.
billyp330 wrote:
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster...
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster having the MEC to begin with. Did they pay either of them for the rights? Also, the same shot was aired on FOX Sports so he didnt need the picture to create that drawing.
toroP wrote:
So, just anyone can be on the track taking photos? No. Who gets to? What are the rules? Image rights? ..... And he didn’t use video...
So, just anyone can be on the track taking photos? No. Who gets to? What are the rules? Image rights? .....
And he didn’t use video footage, he used a unique photo. I bet he carefully chose that photo for its quality. And jeez, it’s just common courtesy, to get permission to use, and to acknowledge, someone else’s work.
Toro , he stated that he found the pic through google , with no name attached to it. Shit I have hundred's of MX / SX pics on my HD here , with no water mark , or any idea who took the pic. I'm 100% sure he would of contacted Steve or Cuby if he had known.

But then again......look at my question above. In " fine art's " such as drawing's , I don't think anything can be protected by copy right's? Because a drawing , is in itself a whole new piece of art. It isn't a copy of anything.
akillerwombat
Posts
3211
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
12/7/2018 8:30pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 8:34pm
brimx153 wrote:
First off the drawing is entirely free hand . I took the picture off goggle images , there was no name of who took it...
First off the drawing is entirely free hand . I took the picture off goggle images , there was no name of who took it , or watermark or copywrite on it . Some have suggested I should have sent guy b or cuby an e mail to ask permission. Well I had no clue who took the photo so that was nt an option . I did the drawing last year , it s of something that happen over 5 years ago so I did nt think anyone would be too concerned about it either way. I'll say this again it s rare I do drawing of motocross. It not like it's my full time job and I making Tons of money off it . Plus any money I do get would be going straight back into the sport anyway (I even offered to swop it for bike parts ) . Plus I was selling the drawing its self ,there were no copies of it .

Guy b if it not comfortable with it u can just tell me and I will delete the thread and bin the drawing ,no hard feeling s

The drawing is not the exact same as the photo . I always use artistic licence in drawing s , mostly in backgrounds ,

Akillerwombat , comparing my drawing to the hope pictures is wrong, imo. That was stealing an idea which imo is different . If you talking law . All that would happen is the photographer could try sue me . The judge would ask did I copy it from this photo . I will say No , point out the artistic differences and tell them to prove I coppied it .which they can t ( even cuby was getting confused on who took it ) that would be the end of story .
I am not that type of person , I have mad respect for cuby and guy b , that s why I have been full honest where I got the photo . But I do think I could of just said , I did not use ur pic , and prove it .
Honestly, do whatever you want man.

I obviously have no clue what I'm talking about.



... and there's no way any judge in the world could see how that ^ drawing might have been copied from a photo that you didn't have permission to copy.

From one art guy to another all I'm trying to do is give you a heads up that doing this type of stuff puts you in the "gray area" that Billy cant shut up about and people who take artists to court over "gray area" shit like "was it copied?" are willing to shell out way more money to detour other artists from taking their work with out permission than you're going to have to defend it.

You're a moto guy. You respect GuyB and Cudby. You clearly know how to get a hold of them. Protect yourself and track down who took the photo and get permission... especially if you are trying to sell it.


P.S. If you ever wonder where you got the photo / who took the photo you can drag the images into Google Image search (https://www.google.com/imghp?hl=en&tab=wi&authuser=0) and it will 9 times out of 10 you'll be able to find the owner (either individual, company, or stock site) where it came from in 5 or less clicks.
4
10
12/7/2018 8:37pm Edited Date/Time 12/7/2018 8:43pm
jeffro503 wrote:
Well....now that we have brought this up , check this out haha. I do feel honored though , but Ezza may get pissed! They stole my...
Well....now that we have brought this up , check this out haha. I do feel honored though , but Ezza may get pissed! They stole my shit!

https://www.amazon.com/Dirt-Bike-Rider-Motocross-PopSockets/dp/B07DWPX6…





Wow, that sucks!
That wasn't mine to begin with though, it was my first time using Illustrator, that's why I never signed it. It's a modified Hackensmith (Ferry) with the only thing left from the original being the outline of his body and the tires. I've seen it used heaps of times. A dude on Instagram used my version and sold christmas cards, he's reasonably well known too.

I saw your Suzuki one on a website though, which is signed and 100 percent mine! It was one of those wallpaper sites.

1
dkg
Posts
1885
Joined
9/12/2010
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA US
12/7/2018 8:39pm
cudby wrote:
All I said is it’s my photo. That’s all.
jeffro503 wrote:
Always , always , always been a fan of your photo's man. I mean , a serious fan that has gone back years in awe looking...
Always , always , always been a fan of your photo's man. I mean , a serious fan that has gone back years in awe looking at some of the stuff you have shot. Will always be a fan as well. With that being said......if it was my pic , I would be honored that someone took multiple hours to do a drawing of it.

I've actually never really thought of a drawing of a famous picture , and what that might mean in the copyright rules and so forth. I mean , it's not a copy by any means , but a drawing , so it's literally 100% different.....right? That question is for anyone btw.
jeffro503
Posts
27632
Joined
7/22/2007
Location
St Helens, OR US
12/7/2018 8:43pm
EZZA 95B wrote:
Wow, that sucks! That wasn't mine to begin with though, it was my first time using Illustrator, that's why I never signed it. It's a modified...
Wow, that sucks!
That wasn't mine to begin with though, it was my first time using Illustrator, that's why I never signed it. It's a modified Hackensmith (Ferry) with the only thing left from the original being the outline of his body and the tires. I've seen it used heaps of times. A dude on Instagram used my version and sold christmas cards, he's reasonably well known too.

I saw your Suzuki one on a website though, which is signed and 100 percent mine! It was one of those wallpaper sites.

No shit? The way I saw this thing I posted , was that Bronwyn was cruising Amazon and found it. You can bet it's all made over sea's. You hit the big time Ezza! And so did I....I guess. Blink Dizzy Dizzy
1
toroP
Posts
4483
Joined
4/6/2009
Location
Cincinnati, OH US
12/7/2018 8:43pm
billyp330 wrote:
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster...
The photo wouldnt exist without Dungey shifting mid air at the MEC. Did they pay Dungey for rights? It also wouldnt exist wihout Feld and Monster having the MEC to begin with. Did they pay either of them for the rights? Also, the same shot was aired on FOX Sports so he didnt need the picture to create that drawing.
toroP wrote:
So, just anyone can be on the track taking photos? No. Who gets to? What are the rules? Image rights? ..... And he didn’t use video...
So, just anyone can be on the track taking photos? No. Who gets to? What are the rules? Image rights? .....
And he didn’t use video footage, he used a unique photo. I bet he carefully chose that photo for its quality. And jeez, it’s just common courtesy, to get permission to use, and to acknowledge, someone else’s work.
jeffro503 wrote:
Toro , he stated that he found the pic through google , with no name attached to it. Shit I have hundred's of MX / SX...
Toro , he stated that he found the pic through google , with no name attached to it. Shit I have hundred's of MX / SX pics on my HD here , with no water mark , or any idea who took the pic. I'm 100% sure he would of contacted Steve or Cuby if he had known.

But then again......look at my question above. In " fine art's " such as drawing's , I don't think anything can be protected by copy right's? Because a drawing , is in itself a whole new piece of art. It isn't a copy of anything.
Easy enough to post the photo here, and ask if anyone knows the photographer.

Then Cudby and GuyB could arm wrestle for itWink
1

Post a reply to: Ryan Dungey drawing .

The Latest