I read the sad news that a 365 person I follow is leaving as the photos we post can be easily downloaded to anyones computer at high quality. I asked a friend to try this and she did. She said all you have to so is "save as" and save them to her computer. Now I am not professional but I do not want other people using my photos without permission. That feels like and invasion and stealing. I feel less comfortable continuing knowing this can happen.
@wac
Oh come on,I just tried it. I save someone`s photo from view-large mode. And the result is a less then 400 kb saved photo? Yeah,it`s okay to look at,but nowhere near the quality of an original (4-5 mb)...
So the lame desperate cyber-thiefs who want to steal my photos,well...go ahead,because there`s no way you`re getting any money out of them.
once you 'jump' to digital, there always some ways to cheat it (manipulate it).
Lowering the dpi, lowering the resolution (max 800px on longer side) and attaching watermark help a little... that's my opinion...
I've thought about this too. But I agree with wahyu that by uploading low res images, a theif won't get much value. I am careful about posting photos of people or "private" moments because I'm sensitive to the fact that others may not want to risk becoming a "public entity." Some of the images on this site are so good, though, that I do believe those photogs should be watermarking their work before posting.
@spaceman I downloaded a picture that I posted today. It was about a 600 kb saved photo. Went into Photoshop CS 5, pressed on the Image Size tab, and easily changed the dpi and image size to the original configuration. The copied photo was very close to the original. You might want to quibble about the worth of any given photo, but some of my work posted has been sold and I do have a proprietary interest.
Yeah, at 1024 pixels (maximum on the long edge), and the downsampling reducing the quality as well, the biggest decent print anyone is going to make is going to be roughly 3 inches, on the long side of the image. Granted that's twice as good as the old 550 pixels (almost), but seriously, people are worried about this? It was no different before, except that the image was a bit more useless than it is now, for anything other than saving to a desktop to admire offline. I suppose with 1024 pixels I could steal an image, manipulate it, and post it somewhere at about half the resolution and pretend I took the (now really, really low quality) shot. :/
Seriously, if people are going to complain about this, they shouldn't be posting anything on the internet to begin with.
You could always ask Ross to disable right-click. Then only people who know where the print-screen button is could steal the photos and do dastardly things with them.
Wendy, I just downloaded your seed pod image into PS. The image was large enough that I was able to crop out your watermark and could still use the image. The resolution was good enough that I could have downloaded it into any electronic media and called it my own. Perhaps I could print it and get away with it, but I could use it electronically. This is a good issue for us all to talk about. Perhaps you need to watermark over the "heart" of the image to protect it, as they do on the stock photo pages.
@jinximages I agree, people are getting their knickers in a twist unnecessarily. If people are worried about this, then either take the proper precautions (watermark, retain EXIF data and only post a low-grade image) or don't post at all.
@vikdaddy the issue Wendy brings up is a valid one. I can easily remove EXIF data in Photoshop, take a low grade image and make it closely resemble the original. If I can do that with limited Photoshop skills, I wonder who else would and could. It seems that the tenor of this discussion is if you post here everything is fair game.
Not to be a jerk or anything, but why are people complaining about this sort of thing now? I mean as soon as you upload your photos into a digital domain they can be stolen, so I don't understand all the complaining now when people have been doing this project for months.
I mean sure you couldn't steal the exact copy before, but it could still be stolen.
Personally, I love this new format and I agree with @vikdaddy take the precautions before you upload
@15johnpatrick You're missing the point - what's different now to how this site was before? If you post anything on the Net it can be lifted, so what's new?
I haven't been here all that long so I cannot address the past issues. I am just concerned because some people I enjoy following may leave. I hope that we would be considerate of the concerns and work to make 365 more secure. I appreciate what others say about watermarks and ways to make your images secure and those are options I should spend time learning about if I have images i think worthy of that level of security. I think there are some stunning photos on this site and I can understand how people might want to use them. If there is an easy way to protect that from happening I think this is worth discussing.
As far as I know the possibility was here before and is true to any photo uploaded to the internet. Security measures for those who are concerned were mentioned here especially small size pictures that can be good enough for viewing on the screen but not for printing. I also heard about a program that can be detected photos on the internet and people that were sued because of violating copy rights.
Hmmm... not sure how to comment on this but, to be honest, everyone knows that if you post stuff onto a public site like this then there is going to be some degree of public access. If you don't want photos downloaded by strangers then, maybe, such a site is not for you. The new layout is no more or less secure than the old from where I'm sitting. Of more concern should be how much personal information you put in your photo captions and profile. But even a secure community sharing website wouldn't be fully secure because anyone who signed up could download stuff. In short, if you don't want people to have access to your stuff, don't post on a public website. Sorry, that's not me trying to be rude, it's just the reality of such websites.
At the same time, however, I've encountered a number of websites where right-clicking has been disabled. Again, this is not completely secure as images can be captured with a screen shot and then edited.
At the same time (part 2), I've also encountered JPEG files which have some sort of built in "tracker" so that the host knows when, where and if an image file has been downloaded. Again, this is not completely, blah blah blah, etc, etc.
@cadair8 and others, I agree. If you're SO worried about someone taking your photo (and I've noticed it's not really the pro's on this site which care, which I find amusing), NEVER put it on the internet. Right click protect? Meh, I can go around that in about 2 seconds. Watermarking, small sizing, etc, all just deter the lazy/unknowledgable people.
What I love are the people complaining, but won't watermark, won't post a smaller size, etc. Not in this thread necessarily, but in the billion others that have been on here in the past few months.
Me personally, as someone who supplements my income with photography and gets published, I don't care about people downloading and printing stuff, that's not where the harm is to me. I've had a Chinese car parts company take a 800px photo of mine, (badly) photochop out the watermark, and use it to sell parts on ebay... parts that weren't even on the car (my car, too, LOL. They doubled up on retardedness that day). I easily found out, wrote both the company and ebay telling them they committed a huge crime under US law because they purposely altered a photo by removing the identifying copyright holder information... and they had the photo removed within one day. So for me, I have an issue with people actually taking the 800px, watermarked, right click protected images. Do I lose sleep over it? No. It's a thing I have to deal with the minute stuff goes online.
Please, folks, don't be drama llamas over this. There's nothing, repeat, nothing anyone, not Ross, not Bill Gates, can do to prevent someone copying an image you've put on the internets. Nothing. Zip. Jack all. Nada. The square root of nothing.
Of course, in the nightmarish future 1984-esque dystopia where every single electronic device in the world is "digitally signed" with end-to-end encryption like in HDMI, there may actually be something that can be done... to a degree, but please don't wait until we get there to discover this would be the worst thing for all of us.
Things have to be open. With openness comes risks. We accept those risks or don't take part in the "conversation". It's your choice. The mentality of expecting the "state", or in this case service provider, to manage simple things on your behalf gets you nowhere, and is sadly endemic in the blameless compensation culture we've been living in for far too long now.
Plus, websites like TinEye can give you a heads up. If your image has been used anywhere major, they may be able to locate it.
I... may have waffled a bit, there. This really does annoy me though. If you want to leave because the site doesn't "protect" your beloved photo of a dead leaf hanging from a branch, feel free to do so, but there's no need for posting about it as though it's the site's, or Ross', failing. It really isn't.
"If you want to leave because the site doesn't "protect" your beloved photo of a dead leaf hanging from a branch, feel free to do so ..."
@eyebrows --- Ok, I got a chuckle out ot this because I have one of those pictures. Hahahaha!!!! If someone want's it bad enough to steal, then they need it more than I. ;-)
I think everything that could have been said has been. So i'm closing this, anybody with some genuine non scare-mongering insight please feel free to email me ross@365project.org
Thanks for your participation, this thread has now been closed.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Oh come on,I just tried it. I save someone`s photo from view-large mode. And the result is a less then 400 kb saved photo? Yeah,it`s okay to look at,but nowhere near the quality of an original (4-5 mb)...
So the lame desperate cyber-thiefs who want to steal my photos,well...go ahead,because there`s no way you`re getting any money out of them.
Lowering the dpi, lowering the resolution (max 800px on longer side) and attaching watermark help a little... that's my opinion...
Seriously, if people are going to complain about this, they shouldn't be posting anything on the internet to begin with.
You could always ask Ross to disable right-click. Then only people who know where the print-screen button is could steal the photos and do dastardly things with them.
I mean sure you couldn't steal the exact copy before, but it could still be stolen.
Personally, I love this new format and I agree with @vikdaddy take the precautions before you upload
At the same time, however, I've encountered a number of websites where right-clicking has been disabled. Again, this is not completely secure as images can be captured with a screen shot and then edited.
At the same time (part 2), I've also encountered JPEG files which have some sort of built in "tracker" so that the host knows when, where and if an image file has been downloaded. Again, this is not completely, blah blah blah, etc, etc.
What I love are the people complaining, but won't watermark, won't post a smaller size, etc. Not in this thread necessarily, but in the billion others that have been on here in the past few months.
Me personally, as someone who supplements my income with photography and gets published, I don't care about people downloading and printing stuff, that's not where the harm is to me. I've had a Chinese car parts company take a 800px photo of mine, (badly) photochop out the watermark, and use it to sell parts on ebay... parts that weren't even on the car (my car, too, LOL. They doubled up on retardedness that day). I easily found out, wrote both the company and ebay telling them they committed a huge crime under US law because they purposely altered a photo by removing the identifying copyright holder information... and they had the photo removed within one day. So for me, I have an issue with people actually taking the 800px, watermarked, right click protected images. Do I lose sleep over it? No. It's a thing I have to deal with the minute stuff goes online.
>if you post here everything is fair game
Welcome to the internet, enjoy your stay.
Please, folks, don't be drama llamas over this. There's nothing, repeat, nothing anyone, not Ross, not Bill Gates, can do to prevent someone copying an image you've put on the internets. Nothing. Zip. Jack all. Nada. The square root of nothing.
Of course, in the nightmarish future 1984-esque dystopia where every single electronic device in the world is "digitally signed" with end-to-end encryption like in HDMI, there may actually be something that can be done... to a degree, but please don't wait until we get there to discover this would be the worst thing for all of us.
Things have to be open. With openness comes risks. We accept those risks or don't take part in the "conversation". It's your choice. The mentality of expecting the "state", or in this case service provider, to manage simple things on your behalf gets you nowhere, and is sadly endemic in the blameless compensation culture we've been living in for far too long now.
Plus, websites like TinEye can give you a heads up. If your image has been used anywhere major, they may be able to locate it.
I... may have waffled a bit, there. This really does annoy me though. If you want to leave because the site doesn't "protect" your beloved photo of a dead leaf hanging from a branch, feel free to do so, but there's no need for posting about it as though it's the site's, or Ross', failing. It really isn't.
@eyebrows --- Ok, I got a chuckle out ot this because I have one of those pictures. Hahahaha!!!! If someone want's it bad enough to steal, then they need it more than I. ;-)
I think everything that could have been said has been. So i'm closing this, anybody with some genuine non scare-mongering insight please feel free to email me ross@365project.org