| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/09/2009 04:04:18 PM · #26 |
Try a drag and drop, or a save picture as... Neither work anymore.
This is probably a good thing, but how in the world will we ever Godzilla-ize anything in the future??? (Or, more importantly, offer assistance with editing if we can't get the picture.) |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:10:54 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
(Or, more importantly, offer assistance with editing if we can't get the picture.) |
Agreed... What the HECK? The best thing about DPC is GONE!
R. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:13:20 PM · #28 |
_
Message edited by author 2009-11-09 16:44:08. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:14:33 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Ivo:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Do we seriously need multiple, concurrent threads on this ridiculous topic. Please don't make me regret putting the blue shirt back on last night. Watermarked or not, it isn't 'safe' in any manner on the internet. Look at the Dr Achoo thread. There was no place he could have placed an UNOBTRUSIVE watermark and not had the image used. Watermarks...you guys must really think highly of yourselves to believe that every image you post is going to cost you all that money when someone takes it. I have seen most of the work on here. Most of us can relax and LET IT GO. |
I have stepped back from this site due to moronic and belittling nonsense like this. This is why DPC has turned me off and there seems to be no way to escape belittlement for ideas as clearly exhibited in the aforementioned comment.
Watermarks are a reasonable and tangible deterrent. As soon as submitters are denied the opportunity remove images from this site, as is the case with challenge entries, we lose the ability to employ reasonable deterrents which may significantly reduce the infringement on copyright. The question is choice and at this point, there is no choice but to accept the status quo when it comes to challenge entries. Though the site may benefit from several enhancements, this one issue is a lawsuit waiting to happen and if it did, I suspect Langdon would get his arse fried.
On all past entries, watermark them. Slap DPC right across the bow for all I care. On current challenges, notify the submitter of the risk during the voting period and allow them to opt in or out. I'm cool with that as well. I also agree on the sensibility of watermarking your own images in your portfolio and shouldering that responsibility. When it comes to past challenges, DPC holds the images captive and does not employ what is seen the most basic, and widely used, measure of image protection.
Doc, if that was my kid, I'd be screaming bloody murder!
As for  ericwoo, pull my finger and take a deep breath. It may help you think clearer and certainly will help your communication skills! Please do not misunderstand this last comment as baiting but rather an honest attempt to remedy this hemorrhage that is happening between your ears.
Please let me know if it helps.
There that's better. |
Wow, I didn't even notice you had left. Anyway, the best way for you to save your precious, priceless works of art there Leonardo, is to keep them off the internet to begin with. Your idea of slapping a watermark right across the middle is well beyond and below poor business sense. If you want to do it, it absolutely needs to be unobtrusive, or just keep your images, especially of your delicate children to yourself. There is no hemorrhage, just some relative common sense that if I fear something will be 'stolen' I keep it locked away. Here is an actual, sensible post with several great ideas:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Personally, no. Anything that defaces the photos under normal viewing circumstances defeats the purpose of the site (the terrorists win). If it were up to me, I'd do the following:
1. Put a stretched transparent GIF over every image. Name the GIF "Contact Owner to License Photo". If someone right clicks or drags off a photo, they'll get an empty file with an official-sounding copyright warning.
2. Enable a standardized DPC watermark as a preference on ALL challenge entries, but make them disappear when logged in. Have a pop-up copyright notice appear upon first login (maybe even with a "more info" FAQ link explaining that just because a photo is on the internet does not make it free). That way, the regulars would get a clean viewing experience, and a thief would at least have to register AND ignore a warning to swipe a clean image.
3. Consider using a script to continually clear the clipboard or remap screen grab keystrokes wherever images are shown full size. You wouldn't be able to use copy-and-paste in comments, but it would serve as a speed bump for people trying to take a screen grab when right-click doesn't work.
That's about all you CAN do outside of using expensive steganography solutions. |
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:14:53 PM · #30 |
Would it be possible to set a folder in every member's portfolio and call it the "Share Folder" and somehow program the site to lift the save as and right click restrictions for all photos in that folder.
I don't do web programming, so I have no idea how hard/easy this would be, but it could solve a few problems...
edit: spelling
Message edited by author 2009-11-09 16:17:02. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:17:29 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Watermarking is not even a sensible idea with the thought that your image will then be safe. If I want it, I can take it. It really IS that simple.
You could say the same thing about locks on a house. Watermarking doesn't have to be 100% foolproof to be a deterrent worthy of consideration. Stock photo site aren't just using watermarks for decoration, ya know. ;-) |
|
Shannon, are you saying that it would actually be better to post an image on my front door requesting that no one enter and steal my belongings rather than keep them locked away and out of sight? That doesn't seem logical to me. However, I do like the ideas you posted in the last thread.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:18:53 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Try a drag and drop, or a save picture as... Neither work anymore.
This is probably a good thing, but how in the world will we ever Godzilla-ize anything in the future??? (Or, more importantly, offer assistance with editing if we can't get the picture.) |
Do you like this in blue? :-)
There is a loophole - for now.
-  Melethia's (I'll delete it soon).
Edit to remove photo. Trick's out of the bag...Thanks for the temporary use of your photo Deb. :-)
Message edited by author 2009-11-09 19:19:07. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:21:01 PM · #33 |
| Nope, can't say I like it in blue. :-) |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:21:58 PM · #34 |
I am opposed to watermarking ... but understand the rationale.
If we were to watermark, I would suggest making it a Preference Item. Check it and your images would be watermarked. Leave it unchecked and your images would display watermark free. And I would hope that images would be watermark free during voting, regardless of the setting selected.
Just my POV. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:26:38 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Shannon, are you saying that it would actually be better to post an image on my front door requesting that no one enter and steal my belongings rather than keep them locked away and out of sight? That doesn't seem logical to me. |
No, I'm saying watermarks and door locks won't stop theft. To a determined thief they're both inconveniences, but that doesn't mean they have no value as deterrents. You're the one pooh-poohing the equivalent of door locks on images. We currently have an open house with no restrictions other than the honor system, and while I don't like the appearance of iron bars across my residence, we can still offer some measure of deterrence. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:32:09 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Shannon, are you saying that it would actually be better to post an image on my front door requesting that no one enter and steal my belongings rather than keep them locked away and out of sight? That doesn't seem logical to me. |
No, I'm saying watermarks and door locks won't stop theft. To a determined thief they're both inconveniences, but that doesn't mean they have no value as deterrents. You're the one pooh-poohing the equivalent of door locks on images. We currently have an open house with no restrictions other than the honor system, and while I don't like the appearance of iron bars across my residence, we can still offer some measure of deterrence. |
No, the "equivalent of door locks on images" is keeping them safe and sound, locked away on your hard drive and back up systems. The equivalent of a watermarked image would be to place a sign on my valuables, stating that they are mine while leaving them unattended in plain sight.
And this is a good plan:
Originally posted by scalvert:
1. Put a stretched transparent GIF over every image. Name the GIF "Contact Owner to License Photo". If someone right clicks or drags off a photo, they'll get an empty file with an official-sounding copyright warning.
2. Enable a standardized DPC watermark as a preference on ALL challenge entries, but make them disappear when logged in. Have a pop-up copyright notice appear upon first login (maybe even with a "more info" FAQ link explaining that just because a photo is on the internet does not make it free). That way, the regulars would get a clean viewing experience, and a thief would at least have to register AND ignore a warning to swipe a clean image.
3. Consider using a script to continually clear the clipboard or remap screen grab keystrokes wherever images are shown full size. You wouldn't be able to use copy-and-paste in comments, but it would serve as a speed bump for people trying to take a screen grab when right-click doesn't work. |
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:37:16 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
No, the "equivalent of door locks on images" is keeping them safe and sound, locked away on your hard drive and back up systems. The equivalent of a watermarked image would be to place a sign on my valuables, stating that they are mine while leaving them unattended in plain sight.
|
Nahh.
The equivalent would be placing your valuables under a 10 ton boulder. This would force the individual to decide whether it's worth renting the equipment it would take to carefully move the rock to get to your high school class ring without damaging it. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:43:49 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
And this is a good plan:
Originally posted by scalvert:
1. Put a stretched transparent GIF over every image. Name the GIF "Contact Owner to License Photo". If someone right clicks or drags off a photo, they'll get an empty file with an official-sounding copyright warning. |
|
How is this implemented with HTML/javascript? I didn't know you could have two images, one overlaying the other. I thought that they couldn't share an element position, at the same time.
In the main image's onclick() event, you could swap the transparent gif over the main image, but then you may as well just disable clicking (right or left) altogether for the image. Either way, someone could simply do a screen capture (or region capture of the image). So, I don't see what Shannon's suggestion would buy anyone.
Message edited by author 2009-11-09 16:45:51.
|
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:44:11 PM · #39 |
| Would something like TinEye still find illegally used images that had their watermarks removed? |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:45:06 PM · #40 |
I'm giving this one 10 posts til locked or moved to rant.
Any takers? haha. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:50:21 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Try a drag and drop, or a save picture as... Neither work anymore.
This is probably a good thing, but how in the world will we ever Godzilla-ize anything in the future??? (Or, more importantly, offer assistance with editing if we can't get the picture.) |
Good points. I also like to save the images for my own use (e.g. use as a wallpaper for a week). That's legal, right? |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:50:50 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by ericwoo:
Shannon, are you saying that it would actually be better to post an image on my front door requesting that no one enter and steal my belongings rather than keep them locked away and out of sight? That doesn't seem logical to me. |
No, I'm saying watermarks and door locks won't stop theft. To a determined thief they're both inconveniences, but that doesn't mean they have no value as deterrents. You're the one pooh-poohing the equivalent of door locks on images. We currently have an open house with no restrictions other than the honor system, and while I don't like the appearance of iron bars across my residence, we can still offer some measure of deterrence. |
No, the "equivalent of door locks on images" is keeping them safe and sound, locked away on your hard drive and back up systems. The equivalent of a watermarked image would be to place a sign on my valuables, stating that they are mine while leaving them unattended in plain sight.
And this is a good plan:
Originally posted by scalvert:
1. Put a stretched transparent GIF over every image. Name the GIF "Contact Owner to License Photo". If someone right clicks or drags off a photo, they'll get an empty file with an official-sounding copyright warning.
2. Enable a standardized DPC watermark as a preference on ALL challenge entries, but make them disappear when logged in. Have a pop-up copyright notice appear upon first login (maybe even with a "more info" FAQ link explaining that just because a photo is on the internet does not make it free). That way, the regulars would get a clean viewing experience, and a thief would at least have to register AND ignore a warning to swipe a clean image.
3. Consider using a script to continually clear the clipboard or remap screen grab keystrokes wherever images are shown full size. You wouldn't be able to use copy-and-paste in comments, but it would serve as a speed bump for people trying to take a screen grab when right-click doesn't work. |
|
Go to a construction site, companies and people put their names on ladders to make sure everyone knows who it belongs to and most people avoid taking or even using other peoples ladders. Put an unmarked ladder in the work site and it will very likely disapear. Does marking it make it theft proof no, does it slow it down yes. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:51:58 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by KarenNfld:
I don't care one way or another if a watermark is put on our photo as long as it's not there during voting. I can see the comments now....this would be great except for the watermark! |
I think this is a perfect compromise for those who want the watermark & those who don't... it's not on their to "ruin" the image during voting and then it's there after the fact to help deter image % prevent under all circumstances, but it can deter it.. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:52:45 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Photologist:
How is this implemented with HTML/javascript? I didn't know you could have two images, one overlaying the other. I thought that they couldn't share an element position, at the same time.
...I don't see what Shannon's suggestion would buy anyone. |
Easy: use layers. Plenty of sites (including Flickr) use the transparent GIF overlay. You can disable right-clicking in code, but there are also plug-ins to circumvent that code. You can't disable a GIF overlay, though. A right-click or drag would get you an empty file with a name indicating that swiping images ain't kosher, and you'd be forced to try a screen grab. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 04:53:40 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by george917:
Originally posted by Melethia:
Try a drag and drop, or a save picture as... Neither work anymore.
This is probably a good thing, but how in the world will we ever Godzilla-ize anything in the future??? (Or, more importantly, offer assistance with editing if we can't get the picture.) |
Good points. I also like to save the images for my own use (e.g. use as a wallpaper for a week). That's legal, right? |
Do you mean, you save other peoples images and use them as your wallpaper ???? |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 05:07:32 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Photologist:
How is this implemented with HTML/javascript? I didn't know you could have two images, one overlaying the other. I thought that they couldn't share an element position, at the same time.
...I don't see what Shannon's suggestion would buy anyone. |
Easy: use layers. Plenty of sites (including Flickr) use the transparent GIF overlay. You can disable right-clicking in code, but there are also plug-ins to circumvent that code. You can't disable a GIF overlay, though. A right-click or drag would get you an empty file with a name indicating that swiping images ain't kosher, and you'd be forced to try a screen grab. |
I'm assuming you can also just save the web page and it saves the image as one of the files? |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 05:17:44 PM · #47 |
| In the case of needing to add Godzilla or Fire to an image, it is still posible. The new gif thing works on challenge entries and portfolio images. However, If you click on "View full-sized image" you can then right click and save the image. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 05:22:40 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by rob_smith:
I'm assuming you can also just save the web page and it saves the image as one of the files? |
True, however some people won't know how to save the page. At least you'd get a file with DPC's copyright notice in the name (more than a screen grab, and slightly better than nothing). As noted many times there are ways around these things, but no matter how simple the lock, some thieves won't bother picking it.
It looks like Langdon's already implemented the GIF trick. ;-) |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 05:37:27 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
It looks like Langdon's already implemented the GIF trick. ;-) |
It would be cool if the image name wasn't "pix.gif", but something more like "WARNING_IMAGE_THEFT_IS_MORALLY_REPREHENSIBLE.GIF" or some such. |
|
|
|
11/09/2009 06:09:16 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by rob_smith:
I'm assuming you can also just save the web page and it saves the image as one of the files? |
True, however some people won't know how to save the page. At least you'd get a file with DPC's copyright notice in the name (more than a screen grab, and slightly better than nothing). As noted many times there are ways around these things, but no matter how simple the lock, some thieves won't bother picking it.
It looks like Langdon's already implemented the GIF trick. ;-) |
Sweet. Now we're protected from that person who wants to use the cute kitty pic as their screensaver. Can't wait for the watermarks. Anybody wants to wager how many watermarks can be remove in under 5 minutes? Someone call Vegas to set the over/under.
Message edited by author 2009-11-09 19:17:44.
|
|
