Nancy Worth is a Colorado based artist who has been artist-in-residence at Rocky Mountain National Park and still leads an annual workshop there, as well as teaching in other capacities, including classes at the Cottonwoods Artists School. She attended Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas.
Despite her southwest and mountain state surroundings, the most appealing of her paintings that I have seen on the web are of Paris, particularly her paintings of the sun dappled quays of the Seine River.
Worth worked in oil originally and then moved to transparent watercolor, to which she devoted herself for a number of years.
She has recently returned to to oil painting, bringing with her the years of watercolor technique, and her oils have a fascinating quality of feeling a bit like both mediums, with some of the airy lightness of transparent watercolor next to the rough painterly textures possible only in oil.
7 Replies to “Nancy Worth”
I really enjoy your introductions to the various artists you showcase. Thank you for doing this!
Nance,your God given talent continues to shine,I saw it first at Lost Valley Ranch and I see it here as well.Living,teaching,and painting in Colorado,congratulations. R.K.
Nancy has created some beautiful artwork. I have several in my home. Her paintings on western themese are particularly amazing.
Nancy I have one of your prints (three cowboys, from the back) and I have loved it for years. Thank you for sharing your wonderful talent! Larry Olson. Lone Oak, Texas.
I know you mean no harm however it is illegal for you to post another person’s work on your blog without first getting permission. As you acknowlege at the bottom of your blog “images copyrighted by their respective owners”.
As a teacher as well as an artist, I have been trying to instruct my students in appropriate use of images not their own; to be careful in “stealing” even if they are simply blogging or posting. The owner may not approve of the context or type of site their work is put on.
We all are responsible – even artist to artist.
Please don’t misunderstand my tone here, I mean to be informative, not argumentative.
It is actually not illegal for me to use copyrighted work as I do in my posts.
Under the “Fair Use” provision of U.S. copyright law, the copyright owner’s permission is not required for small excerpts reproduced “for the purpose of review or education”.
There is a description here on the site of the U.S. Copyright Office: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
You can also find a general overview here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
I think you will find that my use of a few small images of an artist’s work within the context of my reviews falls within this definition.
Someone using a your images for the purpose of review, as I have here, is not specifically required by law to seek your permission.
How much material may be reproduced and what constitutes “Fair Use” depends, of course, on judicial interpretation of individual cases, as it is a relatively loose definition and judgement is based on precedent rather than specifics.
However, when posting the work of a contemporary artist, I make it a practice to put the post up and then notify the artist and ask them to review the use of the work and let me know if they disapprove — providing I can find their contact information.
In your case, you seem to have no actual website, blog or other web presence with your contact information (at least none that I could find at the time, otherwise I would have linked to it). It might have been possible to contact you through a gallery, but I’ve found most galleries less than interested in forwarding correspondence for their artists unless a potential sale is involved.
For a while I tried contacting artists beforehand, but it proved to be unworkably awkward. It has worked out much better to have the post up for them to review, so they can see the actual usage rather than a vague description of how it might be used and time consuming discussions of how many and which pieces might be chosen.
Since I do not require their permission by law, there is no barrier to my proceding in this way, but I will always offer to remove a post if the artist objects to my use of the images.
As a point of interest, in over 6 years and more than 2,000 posts, perhaps 60% of which are devoted to contemporary artists, no one has yet requested removal of their article from Lines and Colors.
However, all of that being said, if you object to the post in any way, I will remove it at your request. (It wasn’t entirely clear in your response if that is your preference.)
Thanks for your response, it was thorough and let me know the process you follow when using other’s art. I was a bit hasty in my email, you do fall, in part, under one of the points of Fair Use, and for this I apologize. Hopefully you have helped clarify for others what the proper procedure is and when you should and should not use images.
You don’t need to remove the image – I also did not mean to be argumentative, but to point out one must be careful in the use of other’s work and that in all circumstances contacting the artist is the right thing to do.
I am surprized that you were not able to contact me and wonder where you found the image. I believe I only put up that image on two places; absolute arts (through which I could be contacted via e-mail) and The Gallery at Rich Designs (who has always forwarded any request or inquiry about my work and to whom you could email or phone). Although you find it “unworkably akward” to contact artists before using their work, it is more so for artist’s to track the uses of their work on the internet. It took several years before I discovered your post.
I didn’t get into the specifics of Fair Use and perhaps I should have (considering I was wrong not to consider your use as commentary). It is a bit of murky water and as you said would require judicial review for a final determination under the law. As for Title 17 of the government code (copyright law), I am aware of the section on Fair Use, and have a slightly different interpretation in some cases.
As for the first point in Fair Use, “non-profit educational purposes”, ( http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html), your post intially appeared to me to support the use of the image by a single sentence of opinion more than use as a teaching tool. However, since this point of law has included review and commentary, use of the work does apply to this point.
As for the third section of Fair Use; “The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole”, this refers to the percentage of the copyrighted work being used, similarily to using a sentence of a book or the whole book. It is not how much of the work takes up in the whole of your post or the size it appears, i.e. “use of a few small images of an artist’s work within the context of my reviews”. Using the entire image of a painting is using the whole work.
“The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.” (http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html)
Most of all, I hope our interchange about copyright will be eye-opening for people who use other’s work on the internet. Using other’s work properly may not be an easy road to follow, but it is important.
Thanks and continued success of your site.
Comments are closed.