Dear Babitha Ek ,

I you have taken the photos - yes you can. You can write "own figure" etc.

If you convert the photo it depends on the app. Eg. if you use vector Q - you have to read carefully and ask better lawyer - maybe there a open source apps, where it is clear use.

I think for academic use in thesis it is not the problem. The problem would be a publishing the thesis, if you haven't read carefully...

Hope this helps.

Best Wolfgang

Hi, this is a valuable question. I’m currently completing a practice-led Ph.D. in which the images I make play an important part in developing the theoretical basis of the work. Imagery and theory are completely intellectually intertwined in my research. Theory generates imagery which in turn reveals new theoretical concerns.

Imagery is often overlooked in scholarly work. I’ve attended innumerable conferences where imagery is simply stolen - taken from the internet - and presented in a professional academic setting where it makes a significant visual contribution to analysis and argument but where there are seldom any references to the sources or creators of the images used. Such blatant plagiarism is shocking, but sadly very widespread. In part this is due to poor intellectual understanding of the role, use and value of imagery within traditional scholarly training methods.

Whilst imagery has often been regarded in some way as intellectually inferior by Western traditions and models of academic thought, this retrogressive view is completely unfounded. Many (Wittgenstein, Foucault, etc.) have reminded us that language has its limits. Images are clearly information - complex noetic propositions - in their own right. They convey ideas and forms of knowing which words often inadequately communicate. As such, what constitutes the image must be carefully scrutinised in a study at this level.

I’d suggest that you consider the relationship between your research questions and the images you hope to use. Do the images answer questions or offer evidence that is distinct in its own right, or are they just pictures which in a more minor way, prove a point? The imagery ought to be an intrinsic part of your argument, a representation of a form of knowledge or experience that us not otherwise so clearly conveyed.

You mention photographing food items. I think your use of imagery here must be clear. If the imagery documents a food staple that is widely prepared, and you’ve readied it yourself, photographs might not be an issue, but if it were a photograph of something which displays the evidence of some more considered labour, whether intellectual or physical, of others - such as a professionally decorated cake - then you could use the photograph as visual information but would have to acknowledge or cite the skills and contribution to your research of the artisan behind the work. If it were photographs of food in packaging, again, you’d have to acknowledge the rights holder or originator of the packaging.

I’m unclear why you’d want to change your photographs into something that ‘looks’ like a sketch. Is this a decorative aesthetic decision or does the ‘sketch’ quality prove a point or put the image at a remove from its photographic roots? Sketches have very different ideative underpinnings, and serve different intellectual purposes to photographs. Their form accesses different systems of visual cognition to the photograph. We see sketches differently to how we read photographs, rather like the difference we experience between poetry and a technical manual. I have always found photographs filtered by software to resemble sketches to be less than satisfactory. They seem quite fake to me. Deceptive or misleading, even. What value does the alteration of the photograph bring to your arguments? How do such values effect your argument and its rigour? Software to achieve such effects can vary a great deal. The results from Adobe Photoshop are much more subtle than many other pieces of software which make the aesthetic decisions for you. Depending on the software, will you have to acknowledge the software and detail the settings you used to achieve the effects you want? This clarity could bring a lot of unnecessary clutter to the work.

Obviously, the results you get from the software will also vary depending on the images that you input. The intellectual worth of the images will also be related to this. Again, if the images you turn into ‘sketches’ bear qualities of the distinct intellectual or physical efforts of others, you must prominently acknowledge their contributions in presenting your imagery.

In a Ph.D. thesis, all imagery should be numbered, often using Roman numerals, and referred to as ‘Figure,’ such as ‘Figure i : Food preparation example A.’ Any recognition of the contribution of others should be made clear in the caption below the figure, and in the thesis acknowledgements All figures, whether photographically-based or diagrammatical in nature should be separately listed against their page number a contents index at the front of the thesis.

Always discuss things with your supervisors, they understand the academic expectations surrounding your work.

I hope this helps

Yes, you can. But u have to mention the purpose.

you can use photographs you have taken yourself (my phd is accompanied by 2 dvds full of photographs). Main rules for this : a) relevant pictures b) clear pictures c) photograph what is relevant (details, but also include full picture for rerference) d) editing and filters used should have a point, and that poin is clarification

Dear Babitha, this is certainly a very interesting technical question. I my opinion there are two requirements that must be fulfilled:

1. The pictures must be meaningful to the subject of your thesis.

2. Use of the such pictures must conform with the PhD regulations of your faculty.

In any case I strongly suggest that you discuss this issue with your PhD supervisor. Even though you will certainly get some good advice right here, it is very important to clarify this with your supervisor. In any case pictures taken by yourself have the big advantage that there are no copyright issues to consider.

Good luck with your work!