ON THE RIGHTS OF THE MOLOTOV MAN

The argument is interesting because it will never end. This is a recurring argument because this situation and others like it are not black and white. I understand both the painter's side and the photographer's side of the disagreement.

As a photographer, photographs are your artwork and you wouldn't want someone to alter and use it without your permission. But, is it really the photographer's art if they are just documenting a moment in time?

On the other side it is the painters job to take and image and create something new with it and if a photograph is just a documentation of the moment shouldn't they be allowed to paint from photographs? Or should you give credit and rights to the photographer?

In my opinion the painter should only have to give credit to the source of the photograph of reference. I think that it was the responsibility of the painter however, to learn the context and history of the image she was painting. Because if she new the context she would have seen how it conflicted with her theme and changed the meaning of the painting.