>   No, Fabien, we talk (at least me) about the *original* image. Clearly,
> our work is not illegal as the original image is used only as inspiration,
> and the final image will surely not resemble too much the original.

I though we were trying to get as close as possible. At any rate, Fabien's
suggestion is good: we could change the image just enough to say it is
inspired by, but not a direct copy of MW's work, so he doesn't feel ripped
off or anything. Let's discuss in what ways we could improve on it, or
complement it. For one thing, it's not entirely clear how the child got
there or why. I think we should add more people, and give something in the
image that hints to a way down there. We could have several folks with lamps
like that, looking for someone/something.

>   The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice
> resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it.
>   What do you all think?

What if we only show certain areas of the image at high-res for reference?
Like the child, a few of the spikes, and one of the box-like sections
closest to the camera? The way Gilles' has "detail" images. I'll crop out
those and send them to you, OK?

--
Anthony Bennett

Post a reply to this message