Nope, this is not a painting. And it's not Photoshop, either.

This one's been around a bit, but just in case you haven't seen it.

A makeup company set up a display in a store window that caught the eye of many people, including University of Hawaii professor Peter Kun Frary, who snapped this photo. The company was trying to make the setting look like it was a painting. They succeeded.

First seen on Laughing Squid. Also on Rocketboom. Also on Urlesque (which maybe had it first? I can't determine which.)


Is art, or is it plaigarism?

The Los Angeles Times has a fascinating story about the photographs of Sze Tsung Leong and David Burdeny. There are a group of photographs that look remarkably similar to each other. But can you say definitively that one photographer has copied the work of another?

The story was originally reported by Photo District News, and the Times adds to the discussion by interviewing collectors and gallery owners for their thoughts on, among other things, the nature of originality and copyright protection.

The LA Times article is here.

Want another timely example of how creative work "borrows" source material? Here is an ad from Pedigree that has wonderful slo-motion photography of dogs getting ready to catch a treat: (And thanks Mark Interrante for the link):

And here is an earlier video from the art collective from Plex Vitalic that, let's just say, might have been a derivative work for the ad:

In other news, and speaking of PDN:

Their selections for the 30 photographers to watch in 2010 was released today, and, as ever, the work is impressive and well worth your time to peruse.