Re: Workflows and Protection
Doug, I don't think that there is such a thing as bullet proof protection against basically theft. I haven't seen yet any of my images ripped, but who knows, may be some of the are. I am thinking that a small (say no more than 800 px on the longer side) web image shouldn't be interesting to rip because it is not exactly printable. But what do I know. And of course such an image can be used as demonstration of one's skill on various web forums. I think that reasonable watermarking and reasonably low quality of jpg should do most of the trick. But then again, I don't care too much (yet!) about my images getting stolen. Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Workflows and Protection
Hi Paul - yes the language is French, and the site appears to be just a personal one, incorporating a blog, some home-spun philosophy, and links to YouTube sites and other web-sites the author finds attractive. It's almost a compliment to be ripped off by him, it seems! John in Brisbane -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of PN Stenquist Sent: Thursday, 11 December 2008 12:05 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: > Howdy, folks, > > I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo > workflow. That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into > Photoshop [Elements] or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted > "just so". > > And that's gotten me to thinking relatively deeply about things that > may not yet admit deep thinking. So, I'm going to throw some ideas > out to the "PDML At Large" and see what comes back. > > I want to provide myself some recourse against unauthorized > reproduction. So I'm thinking about several technologies and > processes to do that. In the past, my "attempts" have largely > centered around providing images on the web that are too small (in > resolution terms) to be of any real use outside the "Webisphere", > and not caring about uses within that environment. > > I'm still planning to pursue that same strategy for the stuff I make > available to the world at large. Nothing more than, say, 800x600 > pixels, for example. Put my copyright in the EXIF/IPTC metadata. > "Brand" a watermark visually into the image. Stuff like that. > > But now it's looking like I can actually make some money from at > least some of my photographic endeavors. So, I want to afford > myself some more, not really protection, but recourse, ass coverage, > whatever. Increase my ability to "prove" that I originally created > an image, after that image has been cropped, resized, and otherwise > mangled. > > So I'm thinking about several aspects of deterring unauthorized use. > Phase one is to "brand" the images with a low-contrast modification > that imposes a notice visibly on the image, and keep the published > resolution "impractically" low. So, just how "visible" is too much > in a watermark? We're only talking about an 800x600 image, after > all. Does anyone have any experience with the "pay-to-play" image > watermarking services? > > I'm also thinking about embedding additional data via steganography. > Does anyone have any pointers or information about creating a > "proper" stegano-embeddable image that's not going to either detract > from the top-level image or be "too detectable"? Should I think > about multiple stegs, with a different data set each time? Just how > resilient are stegs in the face of image modifications like crops, > resizes, and replacement of the "brand"? > > I'm also thinking about "shaving" every published image so that none > of them have the outside 1-10% of the image. Theoretically, if I > suspect unauthorized use, this should help me prove original > ownership. But, when do I shave them? Immediately after capture? > Immediately prior to publishing a particular rendering? Several > times in the middle of the workflow? > > Discuss ... > > :-) > > -- > Thanks, > DougF (KG4LMZ) > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.n
Re: Workflows and Protection
Either photo.net or the Pentax Gallery. Probably photo.net, because the shot appears larger there, and I know that both photo.net and flickr are common sources of free photography. The art directors I worked with most recently at Doner Advertising used flickr and photo.net on a regular basis as sources for comp photos. It used to be that stock houses, which permit comp downlading, were the primary source, but the photo sites are now superior in many ways. Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 1:19 PM, Ken Waller wrote: Any idea where it was taken from ? Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: "PN Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: Howdy, folks, I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". And that's gotten me to thinking relatively deeply about things that may not yet admit deep thinking. So, I'm going to throw some ideas out to the "PDML At Large" and see what comes back. I want to provide myself some recourse against unauthorized reproduction. So I'm thinking about several technologies and processes to do that. In the past, my "attempts" have largely centered around providing images on the web that are too small (in resolution terms) to be of any real use outside the "Webisphere", and not caring about uses within that environment. I'm still planning to pursue that same strategy for the stuff I make available to the world at large. Nothing more than, say, 800x600 pixels, for example. Put my copyright in the EXIF/IPTC metadata. "Brand" a watermark visually into the image. Stuff like that. But now it's looking like I can actually make some money from at least some of my photographic endeavors. So, I want to afford myself some more, not really protection, but recourse, ass coverage, whatever. Increase my ability to "prove" that I originally created an image, after that image has been cropped, resized, and otherwise mangled. So I'm thinking about several aspects of deterring unauthorized use. Phase one is to "brand" the images with a low-contrast modification that imposes a notice visibly on the image, and keep the published resolution "impractically" low. So, just how "visible" is too much in a watermark? We're only talking about an 800x600 image, after all. Does anyone have any experience with the "pay-to-play" image watermarking services? I'm also thinking about embedding additional data via steganography. Does anyone have any pointers or information about creating a "proper" stegano-embeddable image that's not going to either detract from the top-level image or be "too detectable"? Should I think about multiple stegs, with a different data set each time? Just how resilient are stegs in the face of image modifications like crops, resizes, and replacement of the "brand"? I'm also thinking about "shaving" every published image so that none of them have the outside 1-10% of the image. Theoretically, if I suspect unauthorized use, this should help me prove original ownership. But, when do I shave them? Immediately after capture? Immediately prior to publishing a particular rendering? Several times in the middle of the workflow? Discuss ... :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, pl
Re: Workflows and Protection
Any idea where it was taken from ? Kenneth Waller http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f - Original Message - From: "PN Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: Howdy, folks, I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". And that's gotten me to thinking relatively deeply about things that may not yet admit deep thinking. So, I'm going to throw some ideas out to the "PDML At Large" and see what comes back. I want to provide myself some recourse against unauthorized reproduction. So I'm thinking about several technologies and processes to do that. In the past, my "attempts" have largely centered around providing images on the web that are too small (in resolution terms) to be of any real use outside the "Webisphere", and not caring about uses within that environment. I'm still planning to pursue that same strategy for the stuff I make available to the world at large. Nothing more than, say, 800x600 pixels, for example. Put my copyright in the EXIF/IPTC metadata. "Brand" a watermark visually into the image. Stuff like that. But now it's looking like I can actually make some money from at least some of my photographic endeavors. So, I want to afford myself some more, not really protection, but recourse, ass coverage, whatever. Increase my ability to "prove" that I originally created an image, after that image has been cropped, resized, and otherwise mangled. So I'm thinking about several aspects of deterring unauthorized use. Phase one is to "brand" the images with a low-contrast modification that imposes a notice visibly on the image, and keep the published resolution "impractically" low. So, just how "visible" is too much in a watermark? We're only talking about an 800x600 image, after all. Does anyone have any experience with the "pay-to-play" image watermarking services? I'm also thinking about embedding additional data via steganography. Does anyone have any pointers or information about creating a "proper" stegano-embeddable image that's not going to either detract from the top-level image or be "too detectable"? Should I think about multiple stegs, with a different data set each time? Just how resilient are stegs in the face of image modifications like crops, resizes, and replacement of the "brand"? I'm also thinking about "shaving" every published image so that none of them have the outside 1-10% of the image. Theoretically, if I suspect unauthorized use, this should help me prove original ownership. But, when do I shave them? Immediately after capture? Immediately prior to publishing a particular rendering? Several times in the middle of the workflow? Discuss ... :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
"no right click" can be undone even in my browser settings (Opera) so I wouldn't bother :) This is the same problem as with other art - movies, songs or computer programs. I think if someone doesn't want to pay he will find the way around every obstacle you will create. Fighting with windmills I guess. Merlin On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 2:54 PM, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, and i have tried to do the no right click, but i cannot get it to > work with my BBPro web pages. Some one told me you could decline right > click on jalbum, but i managed to get one off. > > Dave > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 9:52 AM, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Howdy, folks, >>> >>> I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. >>> That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] >>> or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". >> >> Hum, there is a poster on pentax forum, that thinks i'm doing >> photography all wrong, since i -need- to adjust each photo i prepare >> for print or web. >> I heard there was a perfect person in the world, and now i know him.:-) >> >> Doug, i have my photos ripped off all the time, some to Facebook etc >> and some even print out the crappy 400x600 thumbs and frame them. I >> have seen them at the shows, hanging on the sitting stalls. Water mark >> and everything. You can count the pixels.:-) >> >> Not sure if i have had any referals like Paul, i may have. Most do not >> offer any photo credit when putting on face book etc, but the odd one >> does. >> >> Dave >>> >> >>> Discuss ... >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks, >>> DougF (KG4LMZ) >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Equine Photography >> www.caughtinmotion.com >> http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ >> Ontario Canada >> > > > > -- > Equine Photography > www.caughtinmotion.com > http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ > Ontario Canada > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
Mark Roberts wrote: I work the same way, explicitly: All the images I put on my web site I license with the Creative Commons "Non-commercial/Attribution" license. Anyone who isn't making commercial use of them can do so without paying as long as they give credit. I put a watermark of my name and web site in the image, but try to make it as unobtrusive as possible (it's there so that people can find me when one of my images finds its way somewhere outside my site). My opinion and policy, exactly. Dario -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
...your other right. :-) Dave 2008/12/10 David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Oh, and i have tried to do the no right click, but i cannot get it to > work with my BBPro web pages. Some one told me you could decline right > click on jalbum, but i managed to get one off. > > Dave > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 9:52 AM, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Howdy, folks, >>> >>> I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. >>> That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] >>> or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". >> >> Hum, there is a poster on pentax forum, that thinks i'm doing >> photography all wrong, since i -need- to adjust each photo i prepare >> for print or web. >> I heard there was a perfect person in the world, and now i know him.:-) >> >> Doug, i have my photos ripped off all the time, some to Facebook etc >> and some even print out the crappy 400x600 thumbs and frame them. I >> have seen them at the shows, hanging on the sitting stalls. Water mark >> and everything. You can count the pixels.:-) >> >> Not sure if i have had any referals like Paul, i may have. Most do not >> offer any photo credit when putting on face book etc, but the odd one >> does. >> >> Dave >>> >> >>> Discuss ... >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks, >>> DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
2008/12/10 David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I heard there was a perfect person in the world, and now i know him.:-) Yeah, we met last year. :-) Cheers, Mr Perfect -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
Oh, and i have tried to do the no right click, but i cannot get it to work with my BBPro web pages. Some one told me you could decline right click on jalbum, but i managed to get one off. Dave On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 9:52 AM, David J Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Howdy, folks, >> >> I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. >> That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] >> or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". > > Hum, there is a poster on pentax forum, that thinks i'm doing > photography all wrong, since i -need- to adjust each photo i prepare > for print or web. > I heard there was a perfect person in the world, and now i know him.:-) > > Doug, i have my photos ripped off all the time, some to Facebook etc > and some even print out the crappy 400x600 thumbs and frame them. I > have seen them at the shows, hanging on the sitting stalls. Water mark > and everything. You can count the pixels.:-) > > Not sure if i have had any referals like Paul, i may have. Most do not > offer any photo credit when putting on face book etc, but the odd one > does. > > Dave >> > >> Discuss ... >> >> :-) >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> DougF (KG4LMZ) >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. >> > > > > -- > Equine Photography > www.caughtinmotion.com > http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ > Ontario Canada > -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howdy, folks, > > I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. > That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] > or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". Hum, there is a poster on pentax forum, that thinks i'm doing photography all wrong, since i -need- to adjust each photo i prepare for print or web. I heard there was a perfect person in the world, and now i know him.:-) Doug, i have my photos ripped off all the time, some to Facebook etc and some even print out the crappy 400x600 thumbs and frame them. I have seen them at the shows, hanging on the sitting stalls. Water mark and everything. You can count the pixels.:-) Not sure if i have had any referals like Paul, i may have. Most do not offer any photo credit when putting on face book etc, but the odd one does. Dave > > Discuss ... > > :-) > > -- > Thanks, > DougF (KG4LMZ) > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- Equine Photography www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ Ontario Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
PN Stenquist wrote: I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. I work the same way, explicitly: All the images I put on my web site I license with the Creative Commons "Non-commercial/Attribution" license. Anyone who isn't making commercial use of them can do so without paying as long as they give credit. I put a watermark of my name and web site in the image, but try to make it as unobtrusive as possible (it's there so that people can find me when one of my images finds its way somewhere outside my site). Steganography is useless for watermarking because it's so easy to remove (there are a variety of free tools available for doing so). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
Thanks Dario. That's a nice thought to have attached to one of my photos. I'm pleased. Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 9:18 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Yes, French, and a saying meaning something like: "A man is good if he can make others better" (btw, you are credited at the bottom) Dario - Original Message - From: "PN Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:04 PM Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
Hmmm... If no one wants my pictures, then I don't have to be afraid of putting them out. And then the chorus: "So, don't be afraid, don't be afraid..." :-P I believe that putting a small copyright notice on one side will suggest an acceptable use for the folks in good faith, leaving my notice there when using my picture. The more people will use my pictures for free, the more I will charge for the ones I sell. Dario - Original Message - From: "PN Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:04 PM Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
Yes, French, and a saying meaning something like: "A man is good if he can make others better" (btw, you are credited at the bottom) Dario - Original Message - From: "PN Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 3:04 PM Subject: Re: Workflows and Protection I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Workflows and Protection
I've found that unauthorized use of my images has only helped me gain exposure. Frequently the unauthorized user provides at least a credit. I think that making images small and marred by copyright notices only hurts one' promotional efforts in the long run. But that's just my opinion. I do demand payment if one of my images appears in a medium that is obviously part of a commercial venture, but that's rare. Most pilfered images appear only in personal and non-profit sites or are used merely for comping. I also should point out that when an image is pilfered for ad comping purposes, it may well be purchased later. But if it's so small or disfigured that it can't be used for comping, the art director will pass it up. Here's an example of an unauthorized use of one of my photos that I just discovered. Not it has a credit. I didn't complain. I just smiled: http://koah.over-blog.com/article-17859115.html By the way, does anyone know what this site is all about? I assume the language is French? Paul On Dec 10, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: Howdy, folks, I'm in the process of trying to automate the end-phase of my photo workflow. That is, the portion after I've pulled the image into Photoshop [Elements] or something and gotten it cropped and adjusted "just so". And that's gotten me to thinking relatively deeply about things that may not yet admit deep thinking. So, I'm going to throw some ideas out to the "PDML At Large" and see what comes back. I want to provide myself some recourse against unauthorized reproduction. So I'm thinking about several technologies and processes to do that. In the past, my "attempts" have largely centered around providing images on the web that are too small (in resolution terms) to be of any real use outside the "Webisphere", and not caring about uses within that environment. I'm still planning to pursue that same strategy for the stuff I make available to the world at large. Nothing more than, say, 800x600 pixels, for example. Put my copyright in the EXIF/IPTC metadata. "Brand" a watermark visually into the image. Stuff like that. But now it's looking like I can actually make some money from at least some of my photographic endeavors. So, I want to afford myself some more, not really protection, but recourse, ass coverage, whatever. Increase my ability to "prove" that I originally created an image, after that image has been cropped, resized, and otherwise mangled. So I'm thinking about several aspects of deterring unauthorized use. Phase one is to "brand" the images with a low-contrast modification that imposes a notice visibly on the image, and keep the published resolution "impractically" low. So, just how "visible" is too much in a watermark? We're only talking about an 800x600 image, after all. Does anyone have any experience with the "pay-to-play" image watermarking services? I'm also thinking about embedding additional data via steganography. Does anyone have any pointers or information about creating a "proper" stegano-embeddable image that's not going to either detract from the top-level image or be "too detectable"? Should I think about multiple stegs, with a different data set each time? Just how resilient are stegs in the face of image modifications like crops, resizes, and replacement of the "brand"? I'm also thinking about "shaving" every published image so that none of them have the outside 1-10% of the image. Theoretically, if I suspect unauthorized use, this should help me prove original ownership. But, when do I shave them? Immediately after capture? Immediately prior to publishing a particular rendering? Several times in the middle of the workflow? Discuss ... :-) -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
