Photographer Caught Photoshopping His Photos From Stock Pictures, Denies Everything Until He’s Totally Exposed
Let’s get this out of the way: there’s nothing wrong with a photomontage. However, when someone is digitally manipulating other people’s work to pass off as their own and using it to advertise to potential clients, there’s a huge problem. And it looks like Ben Sheehan, a pet and animal photographer from Auckland, New Zealand, was doing exactly that.
Photo Stealers, an online “wall of shame” that exposes thieves in the industry, called out Sheehan after he started blocking those who were trying to expose him on social media.
“I had multiple submissions to me after a fellow photographer had suspicions and confirmed that his recent award-winning image was a stock image,” the person behind Photo Stealers told Bored Panda. “I dug in more when messaged and many of his images had elements that didn’t seem right (lighting, shadows [and other things] didn’t match up). After making the initial post with all of the images I had found so far, I found even more when local photographers pointed out the locations he used that did not permit dogs.”
More info: Instagram
Pet photographer Ben Sheehan posted quite a few stunning shots on his social media accounts where he advertises to potential customers
Image credits: Photostealers
He explicitly said that the photos are real
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Photo Stealers highlighted that Sheehan’s story was similar to the 2019 controversy surrounding Lisa Saad, who used others’ photos without credit in composites that helped her win numerous international awards as well as become ambassadors for brands such as Ilford, Manfrotto, Epson, and Tamron.
While Sheehan’s dirty business hasn’t gotten him that far, he too entered competitions using lies and deception.
One of his most impressive shots even made it to the 2021 International Dog Photography Awards
Image credits: Photostealers
In fact, he was a finalist in the 2021 Dog Photography Awards (his entry has since been revoked), and he has won numerous prizes in GuruShots contests.
Sheehan’s submission to the Dog Photography Awards was created using a Getty Images photo of a waterfall in New Zealand as the template for the background.
Unfortunately, stunts like this are somewhat regular. “It’s not always the case but it’s very common for a photographer who has used parts of images or entire images they did not create themselves to make up stories about the image in question,” the founder of Photo Stealers explained. “Photographers I featured before have entire elaborate stories about how they were at the place they were not, how they captured the image they did not and/or about the subjects in said photo. I once had a photographer who stole an image of an infant post a story alongside it about how the child had passed away. The real child was very much alive.”
Image credits: Photostealers
But it looks like Ben didn’t actually take that picture
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
The same can be said about other Ben’s uploads too
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
It looks like he repeatedly lied to people
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
While stealing from stock photographers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Sheehan enjoyed the attention that these images got
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
And continued doing the same
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
But eventually, people found out
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
And Sheehan ended up on Photo Stealers, an online “wall of shame” which exposes photographers who share others’ work as their own
Image credits: Photostealers
Image credits: Photostealers
In response, the photographer took down his Facebook page and deleted the manipulated images from his other personal profiles on the internet
Image credits: Photostealers
Bored Panda has reached out to Sheehan for comment
Image credits: Photostealers
Talking to PetaPixel, Sheehan admitted that he had been passing off composite photos as fully his own but added that all the images he used were properly licensed and paid for.
“[M]y apologies, learned a life lesson,” he said. “But, no photos were stolen, I paid for and have property releases for every picture I’ve used. Including for compositing.”
The photographer also said that he is now on the receiving end of a photographer mob trying to execute vigilante justice over his faked photos.
“[Photo Stealers] followers have tried to ruin my business, abused me endlessly, and I have reported 2 of them for death threats,” Sheehan noted. “Not trying to say what I did wasn’t misleading. But I’ve not broken any laws.”
The person hunting photo stealers said that before PetaPixel covered the story, Sheehan maintained he was innocent and his accusers were actually lying. “This is pretty common for photographers who are caught, especially those that go deep with the elaborate stories about the images they ‘photographed.’ He offered to one user to send all the original images. I was surprised to see him finally admit it in the article.”
They also said that Sheehan wronged not only the photography industry but the general public as well. “Many of these locations have very strict rules against dogs in the park due to endangered species and various other reasons. He was asked many times about this and always maintained he’d got permission and/or had to pay for a permit. People were thinking of going there with their own dogs because of the example he set.”
Here’s what people have been saying about what happened
I think the scariest thing in our world today is finding out how many people are pathological liars. And think they are going to get away with it. But when they're busted, they're not even embarrassed!
In all but two of these pictures the light direction is all wrong. In all of the pictures the dog's edges are much too hard to not be pasted on. In all of the pictures the dog is not sized correctly for the environment. I've been a graphic designer for over 20 years, I can Photoshop anything...anyone with graphic design experience could point out everything wrong with these pictures.
One of the most obvious for me, was the dog running along the wet gutter... you'd see some kind of movement with the puddles, but it's all as still as glass! No droplets flying from wet paws. Not to mention that the reflection is all wrong- That's not how reflections work. And.... the angle of the dog looks wrong, as well as the fact that he's just too brightly lit for that scene. So, so fake looking.
Load More Replies...
How were judges in a photo competition fooled by this crap? Not a single one has the dog lit from the same angle as the environment. There's visible matting around the dog. There's scale problems on most of them. And he even used the exact same dog photo in multiple composites, multiple times!
I had to laugh that a comment to this was a scam job listing
Load More Replies...
The thing is that as photomontages they are not terrible. Had he been honest he could probably have spun it into a respectable business photographing pets. I would have paid for a photo of my kiddy along with a pride of lions. It's the lying that it's just inexcusable. I have used stockl photos in my work for decades. It would never occur to me to pass them as my own.
Back in the very early days of digital photography, I was still using film and scanning - my most expensive piece of equipment was a 2400dpi slide scanner. Back then, I knew a really talented artist who used Photoshop (2.5 I think) to creat amazing images - far better than anything I shot. He didn't even own a camera. Wrote a book (beautiful, too, btw) and NEVER claimed to be a photographer.
...Sheehan admitted that he had been passing off composite photos as fully his own but added that all the images he used were properly licensed and paid for." Oh, ok, that makes it ok then. Not only is this guy a fraud but he's a pathological liar, too The stories he told people who were complimenting him! What an ass
he even used the photo of the "flying" dog twice: just flip the running/flying dog of the city lights photo horizontal and that is the same dog photo as the running/flying dog in the forrest a-614d92d683284.jpg 
He seems to suffer from Donald Dimwit Syndrome: imaging that he's more clever and talented than everyone else on the planet. Hope he gets some therapy
I mean.... he did such an awesome job of photoshopping all of these, why he lied about it? People nowadays enjoying even this type of 'art'
Photography and art stealing happen a lot more often than people realize. A lot of people just search Google for something and think that they can take that image and do whatever they want with it. As an illustrator, I’ve had certain works of mine stolen many times over the last 15 years. Some people use it harmlessly to advertise a band at a bar. Others not so harmlessly to make products on Redbubble, Society6, and such. Others (usually from China) will create products over there and then sell them on Amazon and eBay. Not cool. I’ve had several law suits since 2009. People are not honest. Moreover, people DO NOT respect other people’s copyrights. All they want to do is make money without doing any work or paying anyone else. Regardless, the people that steal the artwork lose the lawsuit every single time. It’s wise to license work from an artist because I guarantee you it will come back to bite you and you’ll have to pay more money from stealing it than you would from actually licensing it.
"I didnt't break any law..." I just lied about my ability as a photographer to take pictures. Setting up lies to create stories on place I never been, on trip I never done.
I think this is a great example of what is going on right now with politics and Covid. People start with a small lie, and then they get so invested in the lies, they go deeper and deeper until admitting they were wrong becomes catastrophic, so they double down and lie some more, and justify and lie again. Once people have fully invested themselves in a narrative, it's very hard to back out of it.
One of the problems in the art world is this false claim that as long as you change a thing or two in someone else's original, you can call it your own. And this is being said regarding any art medium.
Based on the headline, I thought this was a post about the Kardasians.
I would argue that he has broken the license agreement. Many (not all) stock imagery companies, Getty included, clearly lays out that no manipulation or alteration of images is allowed in the terms and conditions of the license.
It's one thing to use stock photos and photoshopped them (which was done pretty well), but to LIE about how he took the photos etc is too much......sad
Why didn't he just promote himself as a Photoshop Artist? There's a market for that. But nooo... he just had to be a dbag about it.
Both are photoshopped, only one person is the original photographer though. I don't understand why people are so desperate for attention from STRANGERS. Why I don't share pictures with anyone but family and friends.
It’s copyright infringement. So, the original photographer does care.
Load More Replies... I think the scariest thing in our world today is finding out how many people are pathological liars. And think they are going to get away with it. But when they're busted, they're not even embarrassed!
In all but two of these pictures the light direction is all wrong. In all of the pictures the dog's edges are much too hard to not be pasted on. In all of the pictures the dog is not sized correctly for the environment. I've been a graphic designer for over 20 years, I can Photoshop anything...anyone with graphic design experience could point out everything wrong with these pictures.
One of the most obvious for me, was the dog running along the wet gutter... you'd see some kind of movement with the puddles, but it's all as still as glass! No droplets flying from wet paws. Not to mention that the reflection is all wrong- That's not how reflections work. And.... the angle of the dog looks wrong, as well as the fact that he's just too brightly lit for that scene. So, so fake looking.
Load More Replies... How were judges in a photo competition fooled by this crap? Not a single one has the dog lit from the same angle as the environment. There's visible matting around the dog. There's scale problems on most of them. And he even used the exact same dog photo in multiple composites, multiple times!
I had to laugh that a comment to this was a scam job listing
Load More Replies... The thing is that as photomontages they are not terrible. Had he been honest he could probably have spun it into a respectable business photographing pets. I would have paid for a photo of my kiddy along with a pride of lions. It's the lying that it's just inexcusable. I have used stockl photos in my work for decades. It would never occur to me to pass them as my own.
Back in the very early days of digital photography, I was still using film and scanning - my most expensive piece of equipment was a 2400dpi slide scanner. Back then, I knew a really talented artist who used Photoshop (2.5 I think) to creat amazing images - far better than anything I shot. He didn't even own a camera. Wrote a book (beautiful, too, btw) and NEVER claimed to be a photographer.
...Sheehan admitted that he had been passing off composite photos as fully his own but added that all the images he used were properly licensed and paid for." Oh, ok, that makes it ok then. Not only is this guy a fraud but he's a pathological liar, too The stories he told people who were complimenting him! What an ass
he even used the photo of the "flying" dog twice: just flip the running/flying dog of the city lights photo horizontal and that is the same dog photo as the running/flying dog in the forrest a-614d92d683284.jpg
He seems to suffer from Donald Dimwit Syndrome: imaging that he's more clever and talented than everyone else on the planet. Hope he gets some therapy
I mean.... he did such an awesome job of photoshopping all of these, why he lied about it? People nowadays enjoying even this type of 'art'
Photography and art stealing happen a lot more often than people realize. A lot of people just search Google for something and think that they can take that image and do whatever they want with it. As an illustrator, I’ve had certain works of mine stolen many times over the last 15 years. Some people use it harmlessly to advertise a band at a bar. Others not so harmlessly to make products on Redbubble, Society6, and such. Others (usually from China) will create products over there and then sell them on Amazon and eBay. Not cool. I’ve had several law suits since 2009. People are not honest. Moreover, people DO NOT respect other people’s copyrights. All they want to do is make money without doing any work or paying anyone else. Regardless, the people that steal the artwork lose the lawsuit every single time. It’s wise to license work from an artist because I guarantee you it will come back to bite you and you’ll have to pay more money from stealing it than you would from actually licensing it.
"I didnt't break any law..." I just lied about my ability as a photographer to take pictures. Setting up lies to create stories on place I never been, on trip I never done.
I think this is a great example of what is going on right now with politics and Covid. People start with a small lie, and then they get so invested in the lies, they go deeper and deeper until admitting they were wrong becomes catastrophic, so they double down and lie some more, and justify and lie again. Once people have fully invested themselves in a narrative, it's very hard to back out of it.
One of the problems in the art world is this false claim that as long as you change a thing or two in someone else's original, you can call it your own. And this is being said regarding any art medium.
Based on the headline, I thought this was a post about the Kardasians.
I would argue that he has broken the license agreement. Many (not all) stock imagery companies, Getty included, clearly lays out that no manipulation or alteration of images is allowed in the terms and conditions of the license.
It's one thing to use stock photos and photoshopped them (which was done pretty well), but to LIE about how he took the photos etc is too much......sad
Why didn't he just promote himself as a Photoshop Artist? There's a market for that. But nooo... he just had to be a dbag about it.
Both are photoshopped, only one person is the original photographer though. I don't understand why people are so desperate for attention from STRANGERS. Why I don't share pictures with anyone but family and friends.
It’s copyright infringement. So, the original photographer does care.
Load More Replies...
134
43