| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/23/2009 05:57:41 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by yanko:
But sometimes the watermark is the best thing in the photo... |
OUCH!!!!! ROFL!
You're a sick puppy, Richard! LOL!!!
|
|
|
|
10/23/2009 06:16:38 PM · #127 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by kandykarml:
No, I don't... I think it's reasonable to believe it.. |
Why??? What makes you think this??
Originally posted by kandykarml:
But, you didn't answer my question about it being optional.. Would you leave if it was optional.. ??? |
Maybe......prolly not, but I'd spend less time here looking at images and making comments after the challenges. Things is, I'd stop looking at images across the board if I started seeing too much of it, and if it got too prevalent, yeah.....maybe then I'd leave.
Originally posted by kandykarml:
edit to note: I'm not looking for people to join for this "make believe" reason either.. LOL.. It's a hypothetical scenario therefore very silly for me or anyone to go out searching for NON DPC members to join.. Don't ya think?? |
Speaking of odd scenarios......why would you watermark this image in the first place?
Who would steal it? Who, other than family would want a portrait of this couple at their wedding?
This brings me back to the DPC giants......if people like Larus and jj beguin don't watermark their stuff, why on earth would I?
Because we know that these small image files just are not going to kill the goose that lays the golden egg. A 150/200 KB image file just isn't any big thing.
All my images that I like I have in BIG format, and I have them hanging in galleries and shows, in 16x20 and bigger. For starters, the difference between the images as they're shown here, and "life-size" is unreal. I'm just not worried about the little copies that *MIGHT* end up on some irrelevant site. |
Exactly !!!!!!! I only watermark the images for which I was working when I took them.... That's why only my portraits are watermarked...
And, you kinda hurt my feelings Jeb... Do you think that because I or anyone other then the ones you named, may not produce an image that someone will fall in love with and want to use it, for any particular reason.. Even in small format.. People don't just use these stolen images for print.. They can use them for internet use only.. So, I guess I don't have an argument to battle yours... If I don't have the names of people who are willing to join DPC because watermarking is implemented, then my voice is irrelevant... I guess if I can't provide you with an accounting of lost wages on a stolen image, then my voice is irrelevant... And, you know you are asking rhetorical questions...
I guess I just come from a place that says.... If you want this for you, then who am I to say NO.... You're coming from a place that says, If you want this for you, then you have to prove to me why you deserve this.. And, I just can't come up with anything.
Message edited by author 2009-10-23 19:01:05. |
|
|
|
10/23/2009 07:02:25 PM · #128 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Even though you don't protect YOUR OWN BUSINESS IMAGES, you need the ones you post here...FOR FUN...defaced and watermarked. You prove with your site that it isn't that big of a deal. Why are you presenting such a ridiculous argument here? LET IT GO. |
I don't know why is it getting on your nerve so much that I want a water mark applied to my pictures in here in case we increased the resolution?
 kandykarml Made it very clear what do I mean by lost money!! what is so hard to understand?
An advance thief can get a machine that pick up the warless entry of an Audi, record it, replicate it to open and start the car. Does it mean stop using alarm systems?
Credit cards, online banking, tons of things that involves money are being done online and there are different kind of risks in them, does it mean to stop it?!!
Btw, using a non water marked picture picture is something, and erasing it is a totally different thing, it is more incriminating if you look at it legally.
Regarding my website, '' thanks for dropping by '' when done wasn't expecting photography to pick up as business,
Once I saved enough from photography, I am getting it done professionally. It is a big switch when you stop thinking about it as .. hey a challenge click click click and start to think about it as a side job or business.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2009 07:02:30 PM · #129 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
And, you kinda hurt my feelings Jeb... |
That wasn't the intent on any level. No aspersions were intended or implied.
I just don't see this as an issue.
Originally posted by kandykarml:
I guess I just come from a place that says.... If you want this for you, then who am I to say NO.... You're coming from a place that says, If you want this for you, then you have to prove to me why you deserve this.. And, I just can't come up with anything. |
That's fine....if you want it, and you have every right, and opportunity to watermark your portfolio images.
BUT.....you do NOT have to enter challenges, you can participate in the community, and side challenges, and watermark away.....BUT.....if you don't want to risk your image, then don't, but why ask the site admins to do extra work because you MIGHT lose revenue.....which you cannot justify, to THEM.
*I* am not the one asking for extra concessions.....and if you look when you download an image from this site, it CLEARLY STATES.....Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
Anyone who is lifting images knows exactly what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2009 07:04:49 PM · #130 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
Btw, using a non water marked picture picture is something, and erasing it is a totally different thing, it is more incriminating if you look at it legally. |
It's CLEARY stated on each image: Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
It's a copyright infringement.
It's not "more illegal" with a watermark.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2009 07:09:02 PM · #131 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
*I* am not the one asking for extra concessions.....and if you look when you download an image from this site, it CLEARLY STATES.....Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
Anyone who is lifting images knows exactly what they are doing. |
Why then are you so intent on speaking on behalf of the site admins... This in NO WAY has any effect on you whatsoever... And, if you look up, this discussion is being held under "web site suggestions"... If the site admins openly request we as the PAYING members of the website to request/suggest/beg for new anything to be implemented, then what difference does it make to you ????????
And please note, I never ever ever ever once said that I expected the site to offer this for free... It is not an extra concession... |
|
|
|
10/23/2009 08:24:03 PM · #132 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
*I* am not the one asking for extra concessions.....and if you look when you download an image from this site, it CLEARLY STATES.....Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
Anyone who is lifting images knows exactly what they are doing. |
Why then are you so intent on speaking on behalf of the site admins... This in NO WAY has any effect on you whatsoever... And, if you look up, this discussion is being held under "web site suggestions"... If the site admins openly request we as the PAYING members of the website to request/suggest/beg for new anything to be implemented, then what difference does it make to you ???????? |
Yes, exactly! Thank you.  |
|
|
|
10/25/2009 01:59:01 AM · #133 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
*I* am not the one asking for extra concessions.....and if you look when you download an image from this site, it CLEARLY STATES.....Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
Anyone who is lifting images knows exactly what they are doing. |
Why then are you so intent on speaking on behalf of the site admins... This in NO WAY has any effect on you whatsoever... And, if you look up, this discussion is being held under "web site suggestions"... If the site admins openly request we as the PAYING members of the website to request/suggest/beg for new anything to be implemented, then what difference does it make to you ????????
And please note, I never ever ever ever once said that I expected the site to offer this for free... It is not an extra concession... |
Bullsh!t. It DOES Affect me, as it does every other regular voter on this site. I already trudge through tons of crappy images to add a vote here so that I can see the 5-20 percent of quality, thoughtful ideas that other artists present. Add a watermark, then I have to trudge through crappy images KNOWING WHO SHOT THEM, and looking at their crappy watermark to boot. Its a crap argument. The only thing you cannot watermark are challenge entries. If that is such a big deal, don't enter the damn challenges. How hard is that?
|
|
|
|
10/25/2009 02:13:48 AM · #134 |
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Even though you don't protect YOUR OWN BUSINESS IMAGES, you need the ones you post here...FOR FUN...defaced and watermarked. You prove with your site that it isn't that big of a deal. Why are you presenting such a ridiculous argument here? LET IT GO. |
I don't know why is it getting on your nerve so much that I want a water mark applied to my pictures in here in case we increased the resolution?
kandykarml Made it very clear what do I mean by lost money!! what is so hard to understand?
An advance thief can get a machine that pick up the warless entry of an Audi, record it, replicate it to open and start the car. Does it mean stop using alarm systems?
Credit cards, online banking, tons of things that involves money are being done online and there are different kind of risks in them, does it mean to stop it?!!
Btw, using a non water marked picture picture is something, and erasing it is a totally different thing, it is more incriminating if you look at it legally.
Regarding my website, '' thanks for dropping by '' when done wasn't expecting photography to pick up as business,
Once I saved enough from photography, I am getting it done professionally. It is a big switch when you stop thinking about it as .. hey a challenge click click click and start to think about it as a side job or business. |
It gets on my nerves so much that you present such a hypocritical, nonsense argument. I don't want to see your crappy watermarks in challenges. Besides then knowing that it is YOUR crappy watermark, it detracts severely from the purity of the image. People here post images for other to share and see them. If someone 'steals' it, so f-ing what? It gets used elsewhere and seen even more. That is why you posted it to begin with, right? She illustrated NOTHING other than a whole slew of 'what-ifs' in regards to 'stole' images. You said, and I quote, "These people are simply ignorant, you are not only losing pictures, you are losing money, you are losing your business, you are losing the chance to upgrade your equipment, you are losing the chance of realizing how good your picture are and how to make money out of it. If you don't care .. then fine, submit your full resolution pictures with a RF rights and let people use it as they like." Right? Then kandy presented a situation of what-ifs and you agreed with that logic. Do, am a ACTUALLY losing money of is there just some slight chance that someone might have wanted to by that image bust instead just copied it without me knowing it? Again...ridiculous. It doesn't matter if your website was done with or without business in mind. The images are still unprotected in your eyes. Why then is it such a big freakin' deal to protect one or two images (AT MOST) each week that you enter into challenges? That is hypocritical. Period. I don't want to see your crappy watermark when I am voting in a challenge. I won't even hang out to look around your website if you see the need to post watermarks there when it is 'professionally' done. I don't like the idea that you are so wonderfully great and talented that every image you post my be 'stolen' and you will lose the millions that you were entitled to from the sales that you lost. If you can't see how ridiculous that really is then I am sad for you. Its a picture. Nothing that you or any of us do on a regular basis is anything special or unique. They're pictures. Sure, pictures finance a lot of different things for me, but its still a picture. If it isn't something I am trying to sell to a client, it isn't watermarked. Doing it any other way only paints a picture of pretentiousness. But hey...maybe you really are the great one.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2009 02:14:57 AM · #135 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Add a watermark, then I have to trudge through crappy images KNOWING WHO SHOT THEM, and looking at their crappy watermark to boot. Its a crap argument. The only thing you cannot watermark are challenge entries. If that is such a big deal, don't enter the damn challenges. How hard is that? |
Wellll, I think they want some dpchallenge stamp on them, not so much a photographer name watermark. So you will not know who shot what. But a watermark will sometimes block key elements of the photo, or brake the mood of it so that it might be viewed differently. There is no point in only adding a watermark after the challenge because in the challenge period you can still easily download all the photos.
Another concern... If there is a dpchallenge watermark on them.... Who is responsible for going after the image thief? Dpchallenge? It is their logo on the photo, not the name or logo of the photographer self.
- how is this viewed in court?
- will a photographer be able to hold dpchallenge liable if the dpchallenge logo'd photo appears somewhere else?
- does dpchallenge have a duty to go after stolen images if the logo is on it
- does a thief have to listen if it is the photographer and not dpchallenge?
|
|
|
|
10/25/2009 02:30:36 AM · #136 |
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Add a watermark, then I have to trudge through crappy images KNOWING WHO SHOT THEM, and looking at their crappy watermark to boot. Its a crap argument. The only thing you cannot watermark are challenge entries. If that is such a big deal, don't enter the damn challenges. How hard is that? |
Wellll, I think they want some dpchallenge stamp on them, not so much a photographer name watermark. So you will not know who shot what. But a watermark will sometimes block key elements of the photo, or brake the mood of it so that it might be viewed differently. There is no point in only adding a watermark after the challenge because in the challenge period you can still easily download all the photos.
Another concern... If there is a dpchallenge watermark on them.... Who is responsible for going after the image thief? Dpchallenge? It is their logo on the photo, not the name or logo of the photographer self.
- how is this viewed in court?
- will a photographer be able to hold dpchallenge liable if the dpchallenge logo'd photo appears somewhere else?
- does dpchallenge have a duty to go after stolen images if the logo is on it
- does a thief have to listen if it is the photographer and not dpchallenge? |
I love DPC and all, but I sure as hell don't want a crappy watermark that isn't even mine marring things up. Very good points about responsibility, but I am sure that those arguing FOR the watermarking would be able to take on liability with the millions they will surely make from the watermarked images.
It's much easier just to stay out of challenges than it is to carry on with this ridiculous watermark argument.
|
|
|
|
10/25/2009 02:31:37 AM · #137 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
I do.
Sander does.
Alan does.
Eric does. |
Holy shit. Its almost like we're friends now. ;-)
|
|
|
|
10/25/2009 02:38:36 AM · #138 |
| I don't think there's any chance that challenge images will be (or allowed to be) watermarked during the voting period. Photographers can already watermark Portfolio images. So, the only issue still under discussion would seem to be whether it's desirable and/or feasible to mark up the challenge images after the voting has concluded. |
|
|
|
10/25/2009 03:03:44 AM · #139 |
I don't know why I'm bothering again, but again, I'm not sure why the parties who are so vociferous insist on this being the site's responsibility.
The ownership and copyright of the images are the photographer's responsibility, period.
Register them with the copyright office as it pertains to your area, retain your own legal personnel, and deal with it on your own.
This is so typical of the obnoxious entitlement attitude today where people expect everyone else to look out for them.
Take responsibility for your own lives and actions......nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you to participate.
One last thing......
Originally posted by AmeedEl-Ghoul:
Credit cards, online banking, tons of things that involves money are being done online and there are different kind of risks in them, does it mean to stop it?!! |
I work in a retail environment, and I cannot even begin to tell you how many of our customers will NOT divulge their credit card information over the phone.......they will inconvenience themselves to an amazing degree, IMO, to not riski having their card number passed over a phone line.
I'm 54 years old, and the majority of my parents' generation, and quite a bit of mine simply will not conduct online transactions for precisely the risks involved.
Not a good corrollary there.....
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 09:26:24 AM · #140 |
Originally posted by kandykarml:
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
*I* am not the one asking for extra concessions.....and if you look when you download an image from this site, it CLEARLY STATES.....Copyrighted_Image_Reuse_Prohibited
Anyone who is lifting images knows exactly what they are doing. |
Why then are you so intent on speaking on behalf of the site admins... This in NO WAY has any effect on you whatsoever... And, if you look up, this discussion is being held under "web site suggestions"... If the site admins openly request we as the PAYING members of the website to request/suggest/beg for new anything to be implemented, then what difference does it make to you ????????
And please note, I never ever ever ever once said that I expected the site to offer this for free... It is not an extra concession... |
Well said kandykarml. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 09:35:52 AM · #141 |
how about we incorporate flash to display the images? (maybe it was brought up in this discussion already, if so, omit my comment)
I wouldnt mind paying a little more to have that feature :)
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 09:44:15 AM · #142 |
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:
how about we incorporate flash to display the images? (maybe it was brought up in this discussion already, if so, omit my comment)
I wouldnt mind paying a little more to have that feature :) |
So then I hit print screen to steal your image. It doesn't matter what you do, images will be used if they are on the internet. Get over it.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 09:44:43 AM · #143 |
| Without reading thru the 6 preceding pages to see if it has been suggested; the resolution is simple enough, make all pictures not downloadable. If someone wants one, a pm to the photog is simple enough. tough to steal something you can't put your hands on. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 09:59:05 AM · #144 |
Well, I will go on the record to say the new 800 pixel format coupled with no watermark makes me nervous about entering my best works. I was sort of blase about it previously with a "it can't happen to me" attitude until it did happen to me. And it's one thing to have a stock image of a toaster or a nice landscape stolen, it's another thing to have an image of your daughter used.
I'm not saying this is a mandate to include watermarks, but just because you think your image isn't going to get stolen, it doesn't mean no images are going to be stolen (for real commercial use, not just on "hey, this is a neat picture" blogs).
It's possible the new size will drive away the top talent from the site, or at least their best stuff. It's possible it won't. However, the people who are running around calling everybody Henny Penny and dismissing their warnings, need to understand my daughter's image is displayed on billboards in a foreign country advertising for a company I know nothing about. This would not have happened if watermarking had been allowed. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 10:07:12 AM · #145 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Well, I will go on the record to say the new 800 pixel format coupled with no watermark makes me nervous about entering my best works. I was sort of blase about it previously with a "it can't happen to me" attitude until it did happen to me. And it's one thing to have a stock image of a toaster or a nice landscape stolen, it's another thing to have an image of your daughter used.
I'm not saying this is a mandate to include watermarks, but just because you think your image isn't going to get stolen, it doesn't mean no images are going to be stolen (for real commercial use, not just on "hey, this is a neat picture" blogs).
It's possible the new size will drive away the top talent from the site, or at least their best stuff. It's possible it won't. However, the people who are running around calling everybody Henny Penny and dismissing their warnings, need to understand my daughter's image is displayed on billboards in a foreign country advertising for a company I know nothing about. This would not have happened if watermarking had been allowed. |
Doc, I usually agree with most of your ideas and postings, but I absolutely call bullshit here. Please upload that image with a watermark that would have both allowed for an aesthetically pleasing presentation AND prevented it from being used in the manner it was used. Covering this part of the image would have surely cost you the ribbon and accolades of voters and would have destroyed some of your best work.
 
Where and how would you have watermarked this one to make it "safe" for posting?
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 10:48:01 AM · #146 |
At risk again for being slapped around by the obfuscation of people who want others to accept their responsibility for security.
This is a "Digital Photography Contest".
It is neither mandatory, nor is any protection implied......though the images ARE tagged with a copyright statement.
Jason, I do feel for your situation, but again, I also know many people who will not post images of their children for this and other reasons.
It will impact the viewing experience, and again, if you want protection and accountability, register your images with the appropriate copyright agency and take the security of your images seriously as part of your responsibility.
But be ready to take the steps necessary to enforce your copyright as well, instead of trying to make it someone else's problem.
FWIW, with the exception of the unauthorized usage of an image of Jason's daughter appearing on a billboard half a world away (Which someone HERE noticed!), I have yet to hear of a genuine issue with this rampant piracy problem.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 11:03:33 AM · #147 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Well, I will go on the record to say the new 800 pixel format coupled with no watermark makes me nervous about entering my best works. I was sort of blase about it previously with a "it can't happen to me" attitude until it did happen to me. And it's one thing to have a stock image of a toaster or a nice landscape stolen, it's another thing to have an image of your daughter used.
I'm not saying this is a mandate to include watermarks, but just because you think your image isn't going to get stolen, it doesn't mean no images are going to be stolen (for real commercial use, not just on "hey, this is a neat picture" blogs).
It's possible the new size will drive away the top talent from the site, or at least their best stuff. It's possible it won't. However, the people who are running around calling everybody Henny Penny and dismissing their warnings, need to understand my daughter's image is displayed on billboards in a foreign country advertising for a company I know nothing about. This would not have happened if watermarking had been allowed. |
Doc, I usually agree with most of your ideas and postings, but I absolutely call bullshit here. Please upload that image with a watermark that would have both allowed for an aesthetically pleasing presentation AND prevented it from being used in the manner it was used. Covering this part of the image would have surely cost you the ribbon and accolades of voters and would have destroyed some of your best work.
Where and how would you have watermarked this one to make it "safe" for posting? |
I don't think anyone is advocating watermarks during a challenge. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 12:22:19 PM · #148 |
Originally posted by d56ranger:
Without reading thru the 6 preceding pages to see if it has been suggested; the resolution is simple enough, make all pictures not downloadable. If someone wants one, a pm to the photog is simple enough. tough to steal something you can't put your hands on. |
You haven't said how?
For anyone else who hasn't read the thread or doesn't know:
1. If you disable right clicking, the file can still be saved as part of a saved web page.
2. If you watermark, the image can be cropped or altered in photoshop (if someone really wants it) to remove the watermark.
3. If you display in flash you can just print screen and paste into any image editor.
Basically if you display any image on the internet it can be captured and used elsewhere, THERE IS NO COMPLETE SOLUTION TO THIS.
So either enter the comps at a resolution you are comfortable with, or don't publish your pics on the internet, plain and simple. I have the same concerns as Jason, so I probably won't be using pictures of my children in challenges. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 01:47:08 PM · #149 |
Originally posted by rob_smith:
Basically if you display any image on the internet it can be captured and used elsewhere, THERE IS NO COMPLETE SOLUTION TO THIS.
So either enter the comps at a resolution you are comfortable with, or don't publish your pics on the internet, plain and simple. |
I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand....the security of *your* images is *your* responsibility, plain & simple. Quit trying to make it a site issue.
Originally posted by rob_smith:
I have the same concerns as Jason, so I probably won't be using pictures of my children in challenges. |
It's quite common for people to not want images of their children published on the Web. Again, the security of your child's welfare is on you. I didn't post images of my kid when she was small because my wife wasn't comfortable with that. Again, dead simple.....don't post images of your kids if you are adamant about their not beinmg used and/or stolen.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 01:58:40 PM · #150 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by rob_smith:
Basically if you display any image on the internet it can be captured and used elsewhere, THERE IS NO COMPLETE SOLUTION TO THIS.
So either enter the comps at a resolution you are comfortable with, or don't publish your pics on the internet, plain and simple. |
I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand....the security of *your* images is *your* responsibility, plain & simple. Quit trying to make it a site issue.
|
But when the personal responsibility leads people not to enter challenges, it *does* become a site issue -- at least to Langdon, I would think. |
|
