Copyright, and all that Jazz

Copyright issues can always seem something of a quagmire for folk like myself who cobble together images using software such as photoshop. Recently I've found myself drawn to a couple of challenges run by some of the talented bloggers out there and have found myself looking at a whole host of images over on wikimedia commons to perhaps use. Interestingly, in the throes of doing this, I've discovered that copyright on Arthur Rackhams imagery has now expired here in the UK as of 1st January 2010, 70 years after his death. Theoretically this means that I can use his images, which seem to fit nicely around one of the challenges I'm working on at the moment.

Why then, does it feel kind of wrong to be doing so?

I've been thinking about stuff like this for a while now. Sadly I have little ability to draw or paint, which in part, is why I taught myself to use photoshop in the first place. It enabled me to feel creative; to conjur up some of the images that have been floating around in my head seemingly since forever. But using other people's imagery does have it's limitations in respect of always having to abide by someone else's rules. All the photos I hunt down are predominantly free stock, but a lot come with conditions of use which essentially inhibits how and where you can use them. On the rare occasions I can actually afford to purchase stock photos, such as the background in my steam punk montage, I'm almost too scared to use them. That's 'proper' stock you see - stuff for grown ups. Eek!

Which brings me back to Arthur Rackham. As a child I feasted on his imagery. I was lucky enough to have a grandmother who kept a lot of her childhood books so I became familiar with the works of Rackham, Beardsley, Dulac, and their ilk from a very early age. Now I find myself looking to deconstruct some of that imagery and the child in me is wondering if I'll perhaps ever be able to do justice to such a beautiful body of work.

I think not.

Perhaps sometimes things are best left as they are?