Copyright information

[maxcorreo]

I have a question regarding copyright. If I do a render of a building, for example of a tower in NY or an architectural render from a image I see on a magazine, could I have a problem with the architect or photographer if I show that building or snapshot on my portfolio of work done in 3D?. Could they said that since I build a 3D of a building I saw on a magazine or book I infringed in their work?. Please let me know. Thanks.

[Nils Norgren]

I am no copyright lawyer but I think you are very safe, when a photographer takes a picture he / she is not required to get permission from an architect. This is especially true if you are not selling the image for profit, if it is only an artistic work then there is no damage to the origional copyright holder (if such a thing existed - which I believe it dosen't in this case).

 

I say go for it,

 

-Nils

[mskin]

let me start by saying im no lawyer...

 

I cant see how the image of a building can be considered copyright protected. A photograph of a building in a magazine may be copyrighted, a set of construction documents are copyrighted, but to say that you can't take a photograph of a building yourself and use it for commercal purpose is insane. wouldn't that mean that someone who took a photograph of the New York city skyline would have to get permeission from each of the buildings designers to use the image? I mean, you certainly cant take credit for a buildings design, that would be fraudulent and plageristic... but sure, you can take a photgraph of a building and say "hey, what a great design - look at the awsome photo i took of it". Than why couldn't you take that photograph to another architect and say "look at the great photo i took of this building... give me a job". Sorry for getting lengthy, but, your digital rendering of anything is your proporty, regardless of where you get the insperation. If your doing a rendering, you can always change a couple of things to make it less like the "inspiring" image, but why bother, your rendering is your interpretation of the image and not the image itself.

[Eric]

I'm going to agree with the previous post. If you take a photo, you're not building a copy of the building, you're simply taking a photograph of it. You're copying the work, but not in the literal sense. Building it in 3D is nothing like building a physical duplicate of the building in another location.

 

Once you finish your rendering of the building it is then your work, and you can take credit for the rendering, and it's legally yours and no one elses. That is, unless you did it under the employment of someone else. Then you have no rights to it, as it's the property of your employer. You will then need to ask your employer if you can include it in your personal portfolio, and you will always need to present the images in such a way that whoever you show the work to knows that you simply did the rendering (or take credit for whatever you actually did on the image).

 

If you copy a photograph, you're copying the actual work of the photographer. The photo is his final product, thus you're breaking the law as he has a copyright on the photo.

 

This is just my interpretation of a muddy issue.