Today was one of those days where one learns in the most unexpected of ways.
I do not know who Patrick Notley is and from comments on the web finding him might be a bit like finding Keyser Söze (Usual Suspects). What I do know is I learned an incredible lesson about seeing beauty in this world.
The day began when a friend sent me a powerpoint slideshow. You can see the pictures that were included here http://www.slideshare.net/RogerinDallas/therapy-through-love I love photography and was blown away. Especially by the last slide which, I read to mean that the photographer who took all the photos is Patrick Notley and he is autistic.
Well, he is autistic but he did not take the photographs. He compiled them and they are works by other photographers. This has caused quite a stir. http://littleflutters.com/creative/patrick-notley-is-a-fake.
I shared the slideshow with friends and we were all blown away by the images. When I found the blog with complaints I shared this as well. Two friends pointed out that at no point did Patrick Notley claim to have taken the pictures and that, as an autistic person who sees the world differently, we should not assume there was any malicious intent but rather a genuine desire to share the beauty he sees with others. This was a huge lesson in tolerance, understanding, compassion, and, acceptance.
We all agreed that these are the most beautiful photographs we have ever seen (perhaps the photographers should hire Patrick Notley as their promoter). More importantly we marveled that someone who is not supposed to be able to communicate well with others could send out such a powerful message. Also, we agreed that seeing the compilation got as all inspired and believing in a world full of beauty and without obstacles or harshness.
There is a saying amongst photographers that a photographers style is like his/her fingerprint. Patrick Notley may not have taken the pictures but the slideshow he put together is definitely a unique fingerprint and for this I say: Kudos Patrick Notley – keep teaching us about life!
Hi Celia,
Thanks for linking to my blog. I know that I was a bit direct in my post, but this is something that I feel strongly about. Photographers make their money through selling their photos.
It would be the same as someone copying and pasting the work you do into a word document, (everything you spent hours, days, months compiling) and sending it via forward to everyone they knew until it travelled around the world. I knew you suggested the photographers hire Notely as a promoter, but would you pay for something that was given to you for free?
There’s no evidence of Patrick Notley. Let alone that he is autistic.
Thanks for the link.
Tash
Hi Tash,
Just to clarify, I am in no way saying that photographers should give their work away for free unless it is something they want to or have chosen to do. At the same time, I would not have discovered any one of these photographers on my own which is why I suggested Patrick Notley (whomever/whatever he is) is a good promoter.
Like you, I do not know the intent or the true author of the slide show. What I am trying to point out is that, legit or not, autistic or not, a very beautiful experience and open dialogue about differences in people, communication styles and levels of comprehension happened between my friends and I.
This does not put money in the pockets of any of the photographers featured but is money the only thing that one should focus on in life? There are many professional things I do for people and for which I do not get paid a dime. If I were to charge for everything I do, yes, I would be financially solid and living the dream life. However, the smile I see on someone’s face when I help them has no price. I know that one day the money for everything I want will appear. In the interim, I’m sprinkling pixie dust along the way.
Like one of my friends said in our debate, the world would be a much better place if we look for the positive first. (-: Again, you do not have to agree with me on this. Just trying to clarify the purpose of the post.
Just had an idea re: making money.
A photographer could chose to donate one or more photographs to a non-profit of choice. Since we’re on the subject, one example would be http://www.autism-society.org The group would circulate the photograph as part of a fundraising campaign and credit the photographer plus link back to the photographer’s website. Most of these groups are pretty good at knowing what their supporters are comfortable with in terms of money so the photographer could ask the group for this information and then create a page of selected works within the target price point. Yes, there is no guarantee that this would boost sales but it would be a legitimate way to address the concerns you raise.
Cheers,
Cecilia
Bottom line first: I don’t think Notley is a “fraud” as I see on some websites concerning the slideshow. Random musing to follow…
But I also think as an amateur photographer, I’d like a mention on a credit page or on the photo itself – as a minimum. I also noticed something like Laoen watermarked on all the photos I saw. The last slide also clearly says the Patrick Notley PRODUCED the slide show – he takes no credit per se.
In fact if you look closely you can see Winkelewski, Dilly, Thomas Agit and others’ copyrights in some of the photos.
The show I saw and why I’m here looking for information on Notley came from an email by a personal friend who believed Notley was the photographer, not just the producer. So, while I hear you about looking at the positive, and the photos are fantastic, I guess I believe in credit where credit is due and a bit more was due.
Looking at the photos from underwater to Egypt to fashion models to special effects to who knows where, I was wondering if this guy wasn’t on the payroll of Natgeo to get around to all the different locations, have the great equipment to take the shots as well as the eye and technique to do such a wide variety of photos. Great shots and not the work of a single person. Still beautiful.
Cecilia, many photographers do donate their work to charity causes. My parents, and most their photographer friends, if asked nicely, do allow their work to be used at little or no cost for a good cause.
When you gave your work as a donation to someone it was something you chose to give. The photographers in this powerpoint and the thousands like it have no choice in the matter.
What if, for example, someone “borrowed” on of my parents’ images to promote a cause or company they don’t support? With their logo on every photo, it will appear they support it even though they don’t.
Is it right for people to make music videos of their favorite songs and post them to youtube? No, it isn’t. Music companies are losing a bundle, because, if you want to hear a particular song, why buy the CD when you can get it free on youtube.
In the same way the photography industry is crashing right now. Even big agencies like Getty are hitting tough times because media–calendars, books, cards, etc. aren’t doing well thanks to technology.
We have no idea who saw this slideshow. Considering I was sent this slideshow by a photo editor, I’m guessing this has been around several big offices. If photo editor saw a photo they liked and wanted to use it but can’t, because, guess what? someone didn’t credit the photographer, then the photographer looses out big time. The editor is only going to use photos they can track down easily.
Lying and fakery is what it is. The men selling snake oil from wagons 100 years ago, probably did make a few
people feel good. So what, this is slap in the face to artists
who use cameras, and those that are truly handicapped in any way.
I have just watched the Patrick Notley slide show and have read all the comments etc. I believe all the photos are superb and credit due to all concerned. If all the above posts have watched the PPS does anyone know what the title of the music is that is used on it.
According to one of the other sights I looked at the music is “Bilitis Generique” featuring Sarah Brightman and the London Symphony Orchestra from the album “Timeless”. The music and the slide was was brilliant was it not?
Many thanks for your reply, much appreciated.
Pat Cahill
@Tash and Daniel, lightened up guys. Just climb down from your moral high horses for spell and give everybody else a break.
This is a slide show of various photographers’ work – brilliant work, I might add. It’s been sent around the world as a collection. Is this doing anybody any harm? Not that I can see. Is anybody losing money over this? Not that I can see. Is the reputation of any of the photographers whose work is included here likely to be enhanced by their work being displayed in this way? I would say ‘yes’ most assuredly.
Good on you! This is exactly how I feel. Patrick does not say anywhere that he is the photographer. Having Asperger’s Syndrome myself and also 3 sons who have it, I agree with you that people need to “Lighten Up”. If only they realised the distress they cause us Autistics sometimes. We (most of us) would never knowingly or willingly hurt or do anything that would cause another any trouble or harm what-so-ever. People need to enjoy the skide show for what it is. Beautiful and brilliant.
This has nothing to do with having autism. Had the compiler simply given the photographers credit at the end on a credits page, it wouldn’t be an issue. No one is asking for money. Just proper credit.
Note to photographers: all the more reason to make sure we put our watermark ON EVERY PHOTO that hits the web!
I get this, I really do. My cousin has Asperger’s and sometimes he and I don’t see eye to eye. (Well, not that that’s possible anyways, he’s 6” I’m 4” 11’….) The slideshow is beautiful and Patrick does deserve the credit for putting it together. But the people who worked really hard to get those photos deserve credit too. It does hurt the photographer if no one knows who took the picture or how to get a hold of them. Perhaps Patrick didn’t intend to do harm, and I respect that, just as I hope you respect where I’m coming from too.
They might be beautiful art, but they are so heavily Photoshopped that they hardly qualify as photographs.
Such extreme beauty visually paired with audio beauty,
blessed me to an extent
that I’m sure it caused neurotransmitters
to enhance my health.
Stress kills,
Beauty is at least partial antidote.
Thank you Patrick and artists,
and those who sent it to me.
Blessings on you all.
I can’t see how publicizing such a wonderful collection of photos can possibly be interpreted as anything but a big plus for all concerned. Whether or not the photographers are credited in big letters, these are still their creations and i doubt very much that their reputations or royalties will be diminished. On the contrary.
What most of the commenters fail to understand is that each of the photos in this presentation represent the expenditure of massive amounts of time trying to get the shot, to learn how to do it, to process the shot; and that each photographer has a sizable investment in equipment, travel expense and other overhead just to be able to get and offer the image. In order to develop these skill levels each photographer in this series had to work for years and possibly decades – none of these are lucky shots and each represents remarkable levels of technical and artistic accomplishment. These people cannot do this as amateurs in all but the rarest of cases, and none of them go through that much work to have their images used without credit or compensation. The professionals are like anyone else – their work ought fairly to be paid for and not spread around to build the reputation of someone else. The people who ought to get credit for helping us see the beauty in this world are the photographers who took these pictures, not the discreditable, elusive powerpoint packager of them.
I can see why people are so concerned, it’s because…….
Wait a minute, pull you heads out and check for the sun, it’s a beautiful day. What Patrick is doing is a wonderful thing, people enjoy looking at what he has put together. Same with the sunset, it was invented by God, does he/she get mad when we sit and look at it with joy in our hearts, I don’t think so Skippy.
Just lighten up and realize your being pretty self centered.
As the daughter of world-famous wildlife photographers, I just want to chime in on this “copyright infringement” debate.
What this guy did was technically illegal, unless 1. he had the photographers written permission 2. credited them for the photos he used and 3. at minimum credited the music he borrowed.
On one hand, I think its a beautiful compilation and I’m glad I took the time to watch it. On the other, if I had run into one of my parents photos in it, I would have been a little annoyed–honored, but annoyed.
The issue isn’t about whether the guy is autistic, and kudos to him if he is, or whether it was a lovely, artistic set up, or even Patrick himself and this one powerpoint, its about the complete misuse of the copyright law on the whole. It is NOT OK to “borrow” pictures you find on the internet. We know it’s wrong if a publisher publishes a photo without paying and crediting the photographer, but the same holds true for Fine Art Prints, “homemade” calendars, school projects and so on. Even if you find it on the web, that photo is the personal property of the photographer.
I don’t care about Patrick’s ppt, I think its cool he’s stretching beyond his limitations, but the trend scares me–the other 999,999 people who think not crediting the pictures is ok. Most photographers are happy to give permission for a one-time use project or have very reasonable fees for prints. So the next time you’re doing something with pictures I want you to ask yourself: Is it really so hard to contact someone before you steal their work? Because it really is stealing folks. Asking the photographer is simple, honors them, and is the right thing to do.
And where are the authors of this beautiful collection of photographs. Surely one at least has seen them and might comment. I invite one of you.
Good day,
I too thought the presentation was lovely and enjoyed it thoroughly. I also share concern about the work being credited properly and possible loss of fees to the owner of the work.
I Googled Laoen and found the complete original slide show minus the final slide by Patrick Notley at http://www.esnips.com/doc/5d2ebcdf-2e93-416f-b987-bf4794a8ab98/Laoen%20German%20Photographer . It seems to have been a 2006 calendar. That same slide show is available on several other sites as well. Patrick did nothing more than download the slide show and add his slide at the end.
There are many references on Google to “Laoen the German photographer” but all seem to point to this particular collection of photos.
Make of this what you will. I offer no judgment on the autism issue but the net result, in my opinion, is an improper use of the photos.
Regards,
Bill
I loved these photos but it was obvious by seeing Laoen in the bottom right cornner of them that Patrick Notley was not the photographer. This is just one more example of people forwarding on information without checking it out first. Take it for what it is worth – that is the world we now live in. Enjoy the photos regardless of who the photographer is, don’t just pass on information you do not know to be true. Patrick may be Autistic but that is beside the point. Instead people have used that info as a commentary on the photos. Don’t forget to think for yourself. Don’t just follow the crowd. lg
Quote from ceciliawandiga:
“Especially by the last slide which, I read to mean that the photographer who took all the photos is Patrick Notley and he is autistic.”
“My name is Patrick Notley, I am austistic and I produced this slide show for you.”
I had also received the email a while back. If you understand what you read, Notley’s statement is very far from what you led yourself to believe.
It did not warrant the lighting of the tourches
Most people take things at face value. That’s why hoaxes and chain letters are so popular. Is it right to use other’s work without permission? No. Am I glad I got to see it? Yes and no.
As a writer, I would hate to see someone plagerize my work.(Sadly, it has happened … in an ad campaign. Of course, I got no credit and no pay. I could have sued but I wasn’t up to it.)
I am glad I dug a little more and not just accepted this slide show at face value. I was saddened and appalled that Patrick misrepresented himself.
For me, the worst thing is I felt deceived and terribly misled. This caused me to lose a lot of the joy I felt while watching it.
It may be his autism that prevents him from understanding the fine points of what’s right and wrong in sharing things as beautiful as these photos and music are. Nonetheless, someone needs to take the boy aside and explain it to him.
@Bill- maybe esnips uploaded Patrick’s slide show and cut off his last slide (just trying to see all possibilities here) and
@ L. Leeson, I totally get where you are coming from on the pics but if the music is past a certain age, I don’t believe copyright applies.
I agree with Dart- lighting of torches unnecessary. ANY time I get an email forward that gives me that “awwww” or “Argh” sensation, I check it out because 99% of the time, it’s not what it seems.
I’m a photographer and I would be thrilled if one of my photographs ended up in a PowerPoint that got sent round the world! (Of course, I do watermark everything I post online.) If he were using it for commercial purposes, that would be another story. But just to share the beauty? Go for it, Patricks of the world!
lisa do you perhaps have a website? i would love to see your photos if you dont mind. And i agree with you.
From my point of view. What this person did is he COMPILED photos from other PHOTOGRAPHERS and he shared the most beautifull photos with other people who would not have seen it if he didnt compile this and sent it out via email. I received the photos for the 1st time today and it was breath taking. He did not steal other people’s photos and made it his own. he just showed us how beautifull our world is through a autistic mans eyes. Is that so wrong to share it with the world?
Hi – just read this as I just saw this powerpoint for the first time today. These photographs are amazing and when I read the last page, I read it correctly, but still wanted to find him. Thank you for the information. People seriously need to chill – LOL I’m a photographer and was not offended in the least.
Sadly you need to think people. That last remark… that he is a “photographer” makes no difference. Many of us are “photographers” but few make a living at it and even less in this age of Photoshop and stealing of copyright. Doing something illegal does not seem to offend many people these days, but perhaps it is time it did once again.
Aspergers is also a very high degree of intelligence on the autistic scale and I had to laugh that although they distance themselves from that diagnosis, in this instance they are rallying around because it sorta sounds positive so ok, they are now autistic, tomorrow they are just like you and me (only smarter but can care less about you or me)
Having been married to someone who has Aspergers, knowing right from wrong is a huge problem, being there is little empathy or caring what others think, and that is a social issue. It was wrong to compile copyrighted pictures and distribute them. Someone who is NOT autistic should have intervened.
Also, Quants (high degree intelligence and focused on equations and computers) are mainly those people with Aspergers, and are possibly the reason for the economic crash the world experienced, and is still recovering from(OR NOT in many instances, especially in Europe and the job market!) Due to the nature of the “complicated” derivatives (CDOs and high frequency trading, economy algorithms) they devised that could be hidden and sliced and diced “legally” but again in such a way they were designed to be non-transparent and to easily confuse and fudge those buying (and the SEC) who were not as brilliant as they are. When no one cares about laws, that is what happens.
Beautiful pictures and nature are all around you people! How does this one compilation change your life? How does passing it on make the world a better place… when visiting the world , being in touch with it (not Facebook and texting!), and taking your own pictures and finding beauty in the world, and perhaps passing those on would make a difference. Passing these photos on is illegal unless this person had permission to do so and nowhere is that statement made.
I would never pass this on as I saw the watermarks and I do not need to “chill.” There is enough “chill” and cognitive dissonance, so we need to understand that if this person has Autism, he perhaps didn’t know right from wrong (unless he is another jerk laughing at the world as he creates spam that will recirculate forever) but those who receive it should NOT be passing on copyrighted material (or spam for that matter…) as we are supposed to be more intelligent and know better.
THAT should be where this discussion ends and yet it is still being passed on and on and on… perhaps by someone who seldom walks outside to smell the roses, yet dumps electronic messages on to “friends” because it made them feel good or the angels prophesied they will all have bad luck if you don’t… pass it on… in 10 seconds… sigh. Use that 10 seconds to ensure it is legitimate at snopes or urban legends before passing on anything!
I am surprised to see that after all these years this urban legend has developed a life of it’s own. Every year someone sends this around in mass mailings, while hardly contributing to the world of fine art, it’s benefit might be to draw attention to asberger’s autism and Francis Lei composer of Bilitis.
Cecilia, what a strange happenstance that I found your blog this morning for I was guided to a posting you made in 2009. Today I found myself totally inspired by the sights of magnificent photography and then weeping when I read its attribution at the end. I was overwhelmed but at the same time a bit cautious. I used Patrick Notley as a keyword search on Google to see if there was more to this seemingly phenomenal person. That is when I discovered your blog.
Thank you for sharing your experience. Whether this person is real or fake does not deter the magnificence in the photography. I just wish, if he is indeed not real, that the credit had been left off at the end of the slideshow or properly given to one or those who truly deserve it.
I am somewhat on the same page as ‘youniquelikeme’ whose posting appears above. Isn’t life completely surrounded by the raw touch of nature? Captivating moments are right before our eyes, music to our ears, within our very grasp and under our noses waiting to be enjoyed. To inevitably understand living, we must observe life at its best, listen to life’s songs, embrace life’s bounties, breathe the breath of life and savor life to its fullest! We have our own slideshow outside:>)
I received this set of pictures as a Powerpoint file attachment in my email today. It seems it’s still doing the rounds around the world.
You said, “More importantly we marveled that someone who is not supposed to be able to communicate well with others could send out such a powerful message.”
I’d like to make a couple of observations on that. Firstly, the word “autistic” itself is not very precise. Rather, we talk of “Autism spectrum disorders” to refer to a range of disorders that differ both in nature and in intensity. So, just because someone claims to be autistic, you should not necessarily visualise that person sitting cross-eyed and hunched up in a wheelchair. Autistic could mean many different things. Even someone with a very slight diagnosis of autism could claim to be autistic, especially if they stand to gain from that claim.
You have assumed that this person may not be able to communicate well with others. You don’t know that. This person may be exploiting the word “autistic” for his gains. Really, who would introduce themselves as “I am autistic”? Would you have appreciated these pictures as much if the word “autistic” had not appeared along with them?
In fact, I have been receiving many such photo compilations of really beautiful pictures. But those collections don’t seem to make as many waves online as this one has–perhaps because the originators in those cases made no claims of personal handicap to tug at the viewer’s heart.
To consider an analogy, a person who needs to wear reading glasses for reading fine print could technically call himself “visually impaired”. Suppose that such a person should make a compilation of pictures like this one and mentions that he is “visually impaired”. Should we immediately assume that he must be totally blind? Should we commend the person for the compilation, saying “it is marvellous that someone who is not supposed to be able to see could do this”?
I think this is among the most vital info for me. And i’m happy reading your article. However should observation on some basic things, The web site taste is perfect, the articles is really excellent : D. Excellent job, cheers
Interesting commentary on this subject. From my perspective it is copyright infringement.without a doubt. In searching for more information on these photos I have found them on several websites. One photograph even had three watermarks on it with one displaying a copyright symbol and it wasn’t the original artist from what I can tell. I feel sorry for the photographer that has to steal another s work and try to pass it of as his/her own.
I stand corrected the photo that I referred to above was indeed taken by the photographer who had initially copyrighted it. The two additional are looking for undeserved credit.
After all this time [these photographs have been in circulation a long time] I want to reiterate that Patrick Notley never at any time claimed to have taken the photos; he simply presented us with a moving collage of beautiful images, with equally beautiful music in the background. I doubt that he knowingly stole the photographers’ work. I only know that when I feel that the world is a shitty, disappointing and stressful place, that I’m calmed by these lovely images and the accompanying music. And another thing. Autism has nothing to do with it. There are varying degrees of autism, which is not a disease, merely a ‘difference.’ For instance many Aspie’s, as they are known, are highly intelligent and sensitive. With so much misery in the world, why the nit-picking? Be happy! Enjoy!
P.S. These pictures are on several web sites, with nothing preventing anyone from copying them, though it’s possible to do so, and photographers should above all know how and protect their work.
Reblogged this on Keep It School and commented:
Just saw this as well as receiving these photos from a friend!
I am an American Special Needs Teacher, I first met Patrick in 2014 in a Town called Husum, in Northern Germany. He carries an iPad with him everywhere which he uses both to draw and communicate and to look at and take photographs. He is very autistic… His father said he never tried to claim the photo’s were his, only that he collated them and put them together to show what he thought was beauty. He has no understanding of the accusations against him luckily, but he has received many many emails thanking him from people all over the World and the “Bundesverband Hilfe für das autistische Kind”
The German Autism Charity wrote and thanked him for all the donations it had received with his name attributed to it. I have subsequently met Patrick on three further occasions and he now lives in United Kingdom,