Oh, shock horror!
Given it's how an awful lot of us get ideas, I think we can forgive you. It's not as if you reproduced his image totally .... did you?
Her fence went diagonally up a small hill with the sun just off to the right side, at the upper one third intersection. A better composition, however there was no way to get this fence to conform to that setup. I settled for a bit of a triangle with the tips of the fence posts.
Excellent image; most of our images may not be original ideas; we are influenced by the images we had seen from our childhood; they remain dormant in our memories and sometimes come out disguised as our own idea; so what? we are presenting our interpretation; that is all!!!
I may have the quote wrong; however I read "Good artists borrow; great artists steal"
I find the idea of "stealing ideas" rather humourous. The creative process is highly iterative and builds on what we have seen before. This is a completely valid approach and in fact the only approach in developing our photographic vision.
I guess it's time to fess up: one thing I often do in exhibits of paintings or photos is look for ideas to steal. My problem is that I usually don't steal them very competently.
One of my favorite museums in this area is the Clark Art Institute in Williamstown, in western Massachusetts. (It's hardly a well-traveled area, but if you happen to be nearby, it is well worth a side trip.) It has a breathtaking display of impressionists. I like to wander that display looking for interesting ideas about composition to steal. It's instructive, since so few of the paintings adhere closely to the standard rules. I don't know that I have successfully stolen any, but at least it gets me thinking more broadly about possibilities.
I am always surprised when songwriters are able to successfully sue another musician for copyright infringement for often what seems to be to be something vaguely the same. I either feel that 1) it would well nigh impossible not to be influenced by music you heard if you are a musician or 2) you should be flattered that someone has been impressed enough to remember your creation and derive from it.
I think for 'stolen' you could use the word 'inspired' when relating your work to a similar themed image!
Photographic plagiarism is something that perplexes me as two images taken with two different cameras on two different days creates the possibility that a given composition can be repeated. Yet there have been cases where accusations have been made and cases won. Nice effort.
Then you get the copy-cat couturiers who see a great outfit on a famous person and in no time there are thousands of cut price look-a-likes on sale!
I think that looking at images, deconstructing them and using them as models for our inspiration is an essential part of learning art - including photography.
I had an image exhibited at a local gallery a few years ago and the exhibit was based on each photographer's interpretation of a historical building. My image was very nearly identical to another photographer's image, yet the gallery chose to display both; which makes me believe that plagiarism should only be attributed to taking another photographer's image and presenting it as your own.