Jump to content


Developments in the UK Potentially Damaging to Copyright


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_photogbuff_1970_*

Guest_photogbuff_1970_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 April 2013 - 02:13 PM

http://photothisandt...-photographers/ And this: is why I put my copyright through the center of my photos. A photo can be picked up from anywhere online, even from forums. And they don't even have to take your best photos. But to me any photo that is good enough to be taken is good enough to "pay for", thus I will enforce my copyright for any of my images.

#2 Gary Worrall

Gary Worrall

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6688 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adelaide

Posted 29 April 2013 - 07:11 PM

Thank you for the heads-up, Why are they doing this in the first place? Just another loophole for someone downloading child pornography, Regards, Gary

- I have a photographic memory but never got it developed -


#3 Art

Art

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario
  • Interests:I have way too many interests and they include: Photography, My 2014 Mustang, Military History, Strategy Games, Video Games (Call of Duty: Black Ops and World at War), Computer Devices, Science Fiction, Movie Buff, Bad Science Fiction Movies of all types, Military Strategy Game Collector, Nikon Film Camera Collector, WWI 1/144 scale Plane collector, Wings of Glory and more... :)

Posted 29 April 2013 - 10:52 PM

Very interesting article. But, as I always say, upload images that can't be printed nicely. That way, what are the thieves going to do with it?

 ...................... 🎥 Just another Photography buff! 🎥 .....................

|_____________________________________________________|


#4 justshootit

justshootit

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cleveland, O
  • Interests:Event photography, candids, travelogues, aircraft photography.

Posted 30 April 2013 - 02:47 AM

Ditto that. Post watermarked, lo-res images and make the image-jackers work to remove the watermark. Only post jpgs and then only ones that are compressed such that enlargement and/or printing will show compression artifact. Posting at 800x532 with quality 6-7 (in PS / PSE) usually does the trick. Jon has posted on how to add a watermark, and there are articles illustrating this on the web. Just remember that even with all this, a determined image-jacker can use fractal-based enlargement software to get around the compress/resize scheme (to an extent at least). . Don
Don
==========================================================
Digital: D610 backed up by a D1x.  Quoted from an unknown source by a fellow planeteer, "Never get rid of a working D1x." I've got to agree.

Film: N90s, F3, F100, F4s, C330s. A few lenses.

Why film photography? I like shooting with the equipment. 6x6 Velvia slides from a C330 have an appeal all their own.

Why automated 35mm/Digital cameras? Event photography is about capturing moments. It often requires quick response. Well done automaton can be your friend or your enemy. It all depends on knowing what it can and can't do. "A man's got to know his (camera's) limitations." paraphrasing Dirty Harry...

#5 Donna

Donna

    Galactic Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2410 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Upstate NY
  • Interests:Photography, gardening, reading, knitting, cooking/baking, exploration with my family..

Posted 30 April 2013 - 08:24 AM

Makes you hesitant on sharing your photos....
I'm shooting with the D7100 and D60 as my back up.

AF-S Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G
AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G
AF-S Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED
Tamron 70-300mm f/4-5.6
Tiffen UV Protector
Tiffen Circular Polarizer

#6 Jon H.

Jon H.

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4447 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 30 April 2013 - 11:01 AM

You can also register your works with the US Copyright Office (at least here in the States) for a nominal charge. J
Jon Haverstick
Southern CA, USA
Portraiture, Wedding, Product, Stage, Real Estate, Corporate, Annual Report, Sports, Event, Special Projects
Photoshop, Lightroom, and Photography Instruction

Website / Blog / Portfolio: www.jonhaverstickstudio.com
Email: jon@jonhaverstickstudio.com

Founding Photographer: Smiles Across The Miles - "Focusing on the Those Who Serve" Pro bono professional portraiture for military personnel and their families.

Publisher: Senior Portraits, Headshots, Two Hearts:One Love, and With this Ring Magazines: http://magcloud.com/.../jchphotography

Professional Memberships:
  • NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals)
  • WPPI (Wedding and Portrait Photographers International)
  • SPS (Student Photographic Society): Educator
  • Nikon Professional Services

#7 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5295 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 30 April 2013 - 01:16 PM

Just make sure the EXIF info is in the file and its not an orphan image - seems simple to me and nothing to worry about.

Never marry someone until you've heard them step on Lego

 

Instagram


#8 Guest_photogbuff_1970_*

Guest_photogbuff_1970_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 April 2013 - 03:41 PM

Just make sure the EXIF info is in the file and its not an orphan image - seems simple to me and nothing to worry about.


Certain sites will strip exif.

#9 Ron W

Ron W

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6673 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Parrish, FL

Posted 12 May 2013 - 09:36 AM

Hugo, you seem to be obsessed by this matter. Just so that I might understand the genesis of your angst, I'd like to know how much revenue you would estimate that you've lost to piracy?

www.ronwooldridgephotography.com

 

 

 

 


#10 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5295 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 12 May 2013 - 09:46 AM

Hugo, you seem to be obsessed by this matter. Just so that I might understand the genesis of your angst, I'd like to know how much revenue you would estimate that you've lost to piracy?


I'd be interested to.

Never marry someone until you've heard them step on Lego

 

Instagram


#11 secludedsea

secludedsea

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adelaide, South Australia

Posted 12 May 2013 - 06:40 PM

Watermarks can be edited out. One of the best ways I have discovered is to resize to 800 on the longest side and then adjust the resolution to 125 dpi. That way, even if they resize it using one of those nifty resizer programs that interpolate well to a larger size, they still don't have all the resolution to work with. It looks just fine on a computer screen, but it will look crappy when resized or printed and they cannot add pixel information to it if you're halving it in the first place :) For me it's not about selling images or reducing piracy. I just prefer to exercise control over the way any of my photos are displayed on a public medium. I've already had one of my Flickr Explore photos reblogged in Tumblr by someone I didn't know, so even though there's no money in it for me and is just a hobby, I see nothing wrong with wanting to have some control over how they are displayed and by whom. Steve

Edited by secludedsea, 12 May 2013 - 06:43 PM.

My Smugmug Photos
My Flickr Photos
Nikon D5100
Nikkor 18-55mm DX Kit lens
Nikkor 55-200mm DX
Nikkor 35mm 1.8 DX
Manfrotto190XPROB / 494RC2 Ball Head
Sony RX100 as small and convenient backup

#12 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5295 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 13 May 2013 - 01:27 AM

If you are setting a pixel dimension (800 on the longest edge in your case) you do not have to alter the ppi (dpi is the dots per inch the actual print head will lay down an electronic file is described as ppi - pixels per inch) as it wont change the quality. I set this at 72ppi - it is 800 pixels long as I specifically resized it to this length.: Attached File  72.jpg   155.97KB   4 downloads This was set at 150ppi - it is still 800 pixels long: Attached File  150.jpg   156.02KB   2 downloads Finally I changed it to 300ppi - yep....it is still 800 pixels long: Attached File  300.jpg   162.24KB   2 downloads

Never marry someone until you've heard them step on Lego

 

Instagram


#13 secludedsea

secludedsea

    Planet Basic Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Adelaide, South Australia

Posted 13 May 2013 - 03:44 AM

I'm just regurgitating what an experienced pro recently advised me. Those were his exact settings in Lightroom and he doesn't watermark at all.
My Smugmug Photos
My Flickr Photos
Nikon D5100
Nikkor 18-55mm DX Kit lens
Nikkor 55-200mm DX
Nikkor 35mm 1.8 DX
Manfrotto190XPROB / 494RC2 Ball Head
Sony RX100 as small and convenient backup

#14 Jon H.

Jon H.

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4447 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 13 May 2013 - 09:14 AM

If you're not "resampling" when changing the resolution, changing the resolution setting has no effect on the pixel dimensions (just document / print size). If you leave the "resample" checkbox checked in the example above, and change the resolution, you'll notice that the pixel dimensions (and the file size) do change. I export all images for web out of Lightroom at 72ppi, 800px in the long dimension, and watermarked (Lightroom presets make it easy). The other advantage to downsampling to 72ppi for web is that it reduces the file size for faster loading in the browser. J
Jon Haverstick
Southern CA, USA
Portraiture, Wedding, Product, Stage, Real Estate, Corporate, Annual Report, Sports, Event, Special Projects
Photoshop, Lightroom, and Photography Instruction

Website / Blog / Portfolio: www.jonhaverstickstudio.com
Email: jon@jonhaverstickstudio.com

Founding Photographer: Smiles Across The Miles - "Focusing on the Those Who Serve" Pro bono professional portraiture for military personnel and their families.

Publisher: Senior Portraits, Headshots, Two Hearts:One Love, and With this Ring Magazines: http://magcloud.com/.../jchphotography

Professional Memberships:
  • NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals)
  • WPPI (Wedding and Portrait Photographers International)
  • SPS (Student Photographic Society): Educator
  • Nikon Professional Services

#15 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5295 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:56 AM

If you are setting a specific pixel dimension it does not make any difference what you set the ppi to.


If you leave the "resample" checkbox checked in the example above, and change the resolution, you'll notice that the pixel dimensions (and the file size) do change.


They do....but that is not really setting the pixel dimension its changing the ppi forcing the software to resample the image. Yes you could contrive a ppi where you end up with (in this instance) a long edge of 800 pixels but you couldn't do that AND specify a particular ppi.

The other advantage to downsampling to 72ppi for web is that it reduces the file size for faster loading in the browser.


It doesn't if you are setting a specific pixel dimension. You could set it to 72ppi or 300ppi or a million, billion, gazillion ppi and the file would be exactly the same size and download at exactly the same speed.

Lightroom's Export Dialogue showing a file being created with a long edge of 1000 pixels and a ppi of 72.
Attached File  Export 72ppi.jpg   166.18KB   0 downloads

Lightroom's Export Dialogue showing a file being created with a long edge of 1000 pixels and a ppi of 300.
Attached File  Export 300ppi.jpg   167.96KB   0 downloads

The file info for the resulting files.
Attached File  File Info.jpg   229.68KB   0 downloads

Both file have the same pixel dimension so they both have the same file size - 76KB - even though one was exported at 72ppi and one was exported at 300ppi.
They won't print any differently - they won't download any differently - they can't be pirated and used with better or worse results - they are exactly the same.





Never marry someone until you've heard them step on Lego

 

Instagram


#16 Guest_photogbuff_1970_*

Guest_photogbuff_1970_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 May 2013 - 03:25 AM

Hugo, you seem to be obsessed by this matter. Just so that I might understand the genesis of your angst, I'd like to know how much revenue you would estimate that you've lost to piracy?


I'd be interested to.


As of late. I've had 3/4 of my blog stolen by a person in Thailand - tabulated costs for copyright infringement would have been in the neighbourhood of $85,000. I've had 6 of my images stolen by a webcrawler and placed on a free web-images site, which would if enforced would have been yet another $1500. I've had two of my images stolen outright by someone in Russia - $500.00…which pretty much comes to about a grand total of about $87,000.

Frankly, I'm a little perturbed, ok, frankly pissed off, by your tacit insinuations that "just because I've sold just a few images that I shouldn't be harping about copyright?" Is that it? Correct me if I’m wrong in terms of your intent. Frankly, you don't have to read this particular thread if you have objections to it. BP & RW. Frankly your comments smack of elitism. You have a problem with me, go ahead and PM me. But stick to the damned topic and don't start delving into personal. It's none of your damned business what my income level is.

Sorry, Darrell, but I'm just a little pissed off right at this point.

#17 Wheatsack

Wheatsack

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Validating
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6516 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Christchurch New Zealand

Posted 19 May 2013 - 04:30 AM

A big appology to Robin and Ron on behalf of Hugo (planet zero hero) Peter
Peter................................................ f8....and be there....

#18 Mr Gladstone

Mr Gladstone

    Planet Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 917 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Devon England
  • Interests:Picture Framing. Digital Photography. Music. Walking.

Posted 19 May 2013 - 06:14 AM

Its a symbol of a slightly broken world, that we base the value of our material on how much we could sue for its misuse rather than on its actual value. If indeed you think that you could get 85k from suing for misuse of your images then why not do it?? You'd have your 600mm lens in no time! :lol: :lol:
Tom.
Nikon D7000.
Nikkor 35mm f1.8 G.
Nikkor 80 - 200 f4 AI-S
Nikkor 85mm f3.5 Micro VR
Sigma 10-20 f4




My Website

#19 gillesk

gillesk

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 19 May 2013 - 08:59 PM

Sad to see that you are still obsessed with this subject....... And that you are still looking for answers. As most have likely noticed, I have not been posting lately and I hope it does not take away my right to do so here. To begin with and as per Ron’s suggestion it would be interesting to know what you feel you have lost from piracy. I would also like to push this further by finding out what (sample images, please) and where you have published: paid / free license or pirated images in publications of any sort (printed material, web links, etc…..). I do understand if such request may be viewed as “offensive” but it would most certainly be pertinent to this matter. As well, I do have another very serious question: why do you post images in forums and other venues? Again, I am not asking this to undermine your objectives, but I believe this is an important question to ask oneself. At one point one needs to figure out what one expect from image postings knowing that there are so many options. What purpose does posting serves for you? Again this is very serious. Thank you in advance. Best regards. Gilles

Edited by gillesk, 19 May 2013 - 09:00 PM.

http://gkorent.wix.com/photography

#20 Jon H.

Jon H.

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4447 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California, USA

Posted 19 May 2013 - 09:12 PM

To a larger point, I know that without registering images with the copyright office (at least here in the USA), there's not much hope of anything other than a cease and desist. How DOES one determine the value of purloined images if one were to pursue a legal action for "damages"? I guess my question arises from Hugo's very specific dollar figures. Not so concerned with what he's sold, published, etc., but how does one arrive at such a specific figure? And in solidarity with gillesk - as I tell my students all the time, if you're concerned about someone stealing your images, don't post 'em - anywhere. A determined image thief will find a way to remove the copyright watermark, metadata, etc. J
Jon Haverstick
Southern CA, USA
Portraiture, Wedding, Product, Stage, Real Estate, Corporate, Annual Report, Sports, Event, Special Projects
Photoshop, Lightroom, and Photography Instruction

Website / Blog / Portfolio: www.jonhaverstickstudio.com
Email: jon@jonhaverstickstudio.com

Founding Photographer: Smiles Across The Miles - "Focusing on the Those Who Serve" Pro bono professional portraiture for military personnel and their families.

Publisher: Senior Portraits, Headshots, Two Hearts:One Love, and With this Ring Magazines: http://magcloud.com/.../jchphotography

Professional Memberships:
  • NAPP (National Association of Photoshop Professionals)
  • WPPI (Wedding and Portrait Photographers International)
  • SPS (Student Photographic Society): Educator
  • Nikon Professional Services

#21 gillesk

gillesk

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 20 May 2013 - 09:16 AM

How DOES one determine the value of purloined images if one were to pursue a legal action for "damages"? I guess my question arises from Hugo's very specific dollar figures. Not so concerned with what he's sold, published, etc., but how does one arrive at such a specific figure?

And in solidarity with gillesk - as I tell my students all the time, if you're concerned about someone stealing your images, don't post 'em - anywhere. A determined image thief will find a way to remove the copyright watermark, metadata, etc.

J


This is exactly my point by asking information as to what has previously been published / sold for use. Licensing fees are usually based on very specific criterias and conditions of image usage, so how did he come up with these figures?

Thank you.

Edited by gillesk, 20 May 2013 - 09:18 AM.

http://gkorent.wix.com/photography

#22 Black Pearl

Black Pearl

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5295 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Whitburn UK

Posted 20 May 2013 - 09:52 AM

First of all there is no need to get abusive, it lends nothing to your post and is very much against the whole ethos of Planet Nikon. If you took offence to my question then I apologise, none was meant - you could have used your own suggestion and PM'd me with your concerns which I feel would have been a better option than being outright offensive on the open forum. Back to the issue in hand then and I still don't see how you have lost any earnings by having an image lifted from the web. Did the images in question have a value placed beside them with an option for people to say purchase a print or pay for its use? If this was the case then you may have some recourse but even then there was no way the person was actually going to pay for the image so have you actually lost any income? Others who were willing to pay could still have done so unless the images were a limited edition run or exclusive use then I suppose you may have an issue still offering them for sale. As to the value of your blog them I'm fascinated to know how you have put a dollar figure on it. Do blogs have a value, a quick Google brings up very little in the way of valuing a blog or anything the pertains to them being a commodity. One other thing - how did you find the images had been 'stolen' and how much time do you spend checking?

Never marry someone until you've heard them step on Lego

 

Instagram


#23 gillesk

gillesk

    Planet Citizen Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 20 May 2013 - 09:59 AM

My 2cents worth. Any aspiring photographer should concentrate on just one thing: skills. And to elaborate on this, one needs a least 2 sets of skills: photography skills and marketting skills. There is an important 3rd skill that is also good to have: inter-personal skill. The order in which one decides to approach this may vary as to which skill to work on first. This is obiously not intendeded to be arrogant to the original poster but there may be something to learn here: 1) anger reflects on the way you portray yourself. 2) Change the way you operate. If licensing is what you are after, submit your work to stock agencies for some sort of security. And limit your postings to just your crappy work so you can forget about getting aggravated: but you will only be known at large as a crappy photographer. This said, again, work on your skill sets and you will likely achieve some sort of success with minimal aggravation. You may even become a happy guy. Respectfully. Gilles http://www.wildlife-expressions.com

Edited by gillesk, 20 May 2013 - 10:00 AM.

http://gkorent.wix.com/photography

#24 justshootit

justshootit

    Deep Space Hero Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4082 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cleveland, O
  • Interests:Event photography, candids, travelogues, aircraft photography.

Posted 20 May 2013 - 11:26 PM

Cussing tirades are simply not acceptable here. I was pretty turned off when I read that post and BP is right -- it was uncalled for and is completely out of bounds as to the etiquette here. Do you really think that someone who has lifted your image would've paid you for it if they couldn't take it for free?? Maybe in 0.5% or less of the cases. You can file all your images with the copyright office and then prepare to sue for damages if you find a violation, but do you really want to spend your time meeting with lawyers and being in a siege mentality? Not worth it. If you want to protect your images from theft, only post them in private, password protected forums and heavily watermark the images you use to advertise -- this will cut down on theft but won't stop it entirely. As Jon said, if you absolutely don't want images lifted, don't put them out there. Don
Don
==========================================================
Digital: D610 backed up by a D1x.  Quoted from an unknown source by a fellow planeteer, "Never get rid of a working D1x." I've got to agree.

Film: N90s, F3, F100, F4s, C330s. A few lenses.

Why film photography? I like shooting with the equipment. 6x6 Velvia slides from a C330 have an appeal all their own.

Why automated 35mm/Digital cameras? Event photography is about capturing moments. It often requires quick response. Well done automaton can be your friend or your enemy. It all depends on knowing what it can and can't do. "A man's got to know his (camera's) limitations." paraphrasing Dirty Harry...

#25 Art

Art

    Eon Timewave Master Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario
  • Interests:I have way too many interests and they include: Photography, My 2014 Mustang, Military History, Strategy Games, Video Games (Call of Duty: Black Ops and World at War), Computer Devices, Science Fiction, Movie Buff, Bad Science Fiction Movies of all types, Military Strategy Game Collector, Nikon Film Camera Collector, WWI 1/144 scale Plane collector, Wings of Glory and more... :)

Posted 22 May 2013 - 11:09 PM

Thanks BP, enjoyed the Photoshop tips! Very helpful.

 ...................... 🎥 Just another Photography buff! 🎥 .....................

|_____________________________________________________|


#26 Sailjunkie

Sailjunkie

    Deep Space Master Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6173 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Port Moody, BC Canada
  • Interests:Photography, Sailing, Listening to Jazz, Reading

Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:17 PM

Very interesting article. But, as I always say, upload images that can't be printed nicely. That way, what are the thieves going to do with it?


Excellent advice, Art. I chose Zenfolio because of password protection, and the fact that I can upload low res images. Thieves can have at it as much as they like. Of course, Jon is right to suggest that if it is a huge concern, don't post.

Finally, cussing tirades add nothing to the dialogue. I like PN because such tirades are almost non-existent. If it really needs to be said, PMs might be the way to go.
Mark

D810
Various lenses

Member, Canadian Association for Photographic Art

http://markshawphotography.ca

#27 Virgil

Virgil

    Galactic Hero Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vienna / Austria
  • Interests:my family, photography, everything thatīs fast, my Triumph bike

Posted 25 May 2013 - 05:26 PM

I think Proīs usually donīt face that problem cos they usually donīt use flickr or other plattforms. Theyīve their own homepage where they present a set of shots which canīt be reused. They have another problem (like i had recently) - they grant rights to the legitimate client but family, friends or alike get copies which would possibly be ok as long as they donīt use them for commercial stuff. But thatīs something you never can completely even if you have a respective legal language in your contract which clearly states the consequences of such rights violation.
Cheers

Virgil

#28 gregc

gregc

    Planet Guardian Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois - USA
  • Interests:Photography, Competitive Target Shooting, Field Target - Rifle, PFT - Pistol Field Target, Indoor Silhouette, Cooking, Adult AirGuns, Computers, Martial Arts.

Posted 03 March 2014 - 08:14 PM

http://photothisandt...-photographers/ And this: is why I put my copyright through the center of my photos. A photo can be picked up from anywhere online, even from forums. And they don't even have to take your best photos. But to me any photo that is good enough to be taken is good enough to "pay for", thus I will enforce my copyright for any of my images.

 

http://photothisandt...-photographers/ And this: is why I put my copyright through the center of my photos. A photo can be picked up from anywhere online, even from forums. And they don't even have to take your best photos. But to me any photo that is good enough to be taken is good enough to "pay for", thus I will enforce my copyright for any of my images.

Sounds like someone in charge is on drugs if you ask me. How in the heck can they say you don't have rights at the point of creation and thereafter?


SOME OF WHAT'S In MY GEAR BAGS
 
 
Nikon D3 bodies X 2 (two) and One (1) D3s fitted with leather grips
Mamiya 645 with Lenses| Bellows | glass filters
Minolta 9000s with motor drives (part of my old film-based gear)
Cambo Legend 4"x5" kit (Lenses | bag bellows | loupe | Sheet film holders..etc.)
Sony HVR-Z7U HDV Camcorder & DCR-DVD D650 HandyCam (just in case)
 
Nikon Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 f2.8 AF-S G ED VR Nikon Nikkor AF-S G IF-ED VR 300 mm F/2.8G VR IF G ED| AF Fisheye Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 G ED | Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm|Nikon calls this the AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED | Fotodiox Pro Nikon Large Format 4x5 Adapter Minolta Flash Meter IV and Flash Meter III with various diffusers and a 5 degree spot meter attachment | Bogen 3051 tripod with 3047 HD 3-way head | Manfrotto 679B Monopod | BEIKE BK-45 Gimbal Head Neewer 110CM 43" 5-in-1 Collapsible Multi-Disc Reflectors (2) | Opteka RH-42 Reflector Holders (2) | Paul C Buff 22" Silver Beauty Dish & Diffuser | Photoflex medium and large Multi-Domes | Fotodiox 12"x 80" Strip Boxes with Egg Crates (2) | Shoot & DSLR Kit Wireless Flash Triggers | Zeikos White Balance Card Trio (white, black and 18%) | Calumet 32" and 44" Umbrellas (2 sets) | 5 White Lighting (P.Buff) Ultras with grids | barn doors | light stands | background stand | various seamless papers | Bogen 3085 Boom arms (2) | OCF: Nikon SB800 | Electronic and Manual Cable Releases | Tamarac MXS536801 & MXS536901 Memory/battery management wallets | 8-10 SanDisk CF Cards | Background Projector Box with patterns | HP Laptop (carried to location in camera case) | Calumet Pro Series RC1188 Rolling Camera Case | Cleaning kit | Muslin clamps | Color Gels | USB Cables | Lots of other stuff to keep this list shorter
 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users