Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2013, 12:32 PM
 
5,453 posts, read 9,330,902 times
Reputation: 2141

Advertisements

Have you seen this:
Study Looks Into Whether Photo Websites Play Nicely with Copyright Metadata
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2013, 06:02 PM
 
Location: A Very Naughtytown In Northwestern Montanifornia U.S.A.
1,088 posts, read 1,954,078 times
Reputation: 1986
I stopped posting my photos onto Facebook for these same reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2013, 08:49 PM
 
13,276 posts, read 21,904,706 times
Reputation: 14181
Quote:
Originally Posted by DontLookPhoto View Post
I stopped posting my photos onto Facebook for these same reasons.
Interesting, since the images you post never contain any metadata except for "Software: Picasa".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2013, 09:19 PM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,200,077 times
Reputation: 17866
I'll play the devils advocate.

Stripping the metadata saves a few bytes of bandwidth, probably not a very good excuse at this point in time but if you're a huge site the bandwidth saved is going to be substantial. Most image programs do this with the "save for web" option or at least used too.

Their may be some privacy concerns here and they have a blanket policy of stripping all that information. The GPS data would be the most important. I have to wonder if that led many of these sites to just strip it all out of concern over lawsuits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2013, 10:29 PM
 
Location: A Very Naughtytown In Northwestern Montanifornia U.S.A.
1,088 posts, read 1,954,078 times
Reputation: 1986
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdog View Post
Interesting, since the images you post never contain any metadata except for "Software: Picasa".
Only because the photos I have posted for the most part are ones that I used Picasa tools on.
I post on several websites and not all are ones that I edited in Picasa.
Google makes the users of Picasa share the copyrights with them and they do strip and replace data.
Many of my photographs I used to post on F.B. I did not use google tools on.

We are a little pissed off at Facebook as we caught them changing our privacy settings three times already. They also had removed my text and my copyright mark from many of the pics I posted there.

Notice that I only post smallish framed photos here? The originals are in the 4,000 x 2400 pixel range depending on the telephoto lens range and / or the camera we use and we do a lot of cropping as well as image resizing. My best photos I don't post anywhere. We are saving most of our good pics for when we re-open our gift shop / gallery. We were planning to buy an Epson four foot wide flatbed printer that can print lacquer on thick uneven materials.
We really aren't sure if we want to be bothered with running a shop again, we want to be totally retired but medical bills are keeping us needing more income.
I am archiving my 4,000 + photographs on discs as well as an external drive. When we are done with that project we will pay for the full version of PicMonkey after we delete all our photos from the computer we use for our photos and graphic projects and we will uninstall Picasa.

The 4,000 or so photos that I am archiving are just the ones on this computer. I'm 61 and have been taking photos since I was 9. We have done a lot of scanning, archiving and backing up copies several times so I really don't know how many photos I have.
If I include all my old paper pictures and all the ones that have been backed up and archived I would guess that I could have well over 12,000 or 13,000 photographs. Very few are ever posted on the Internet and when I do they are mostly greatly reduced in size and framed.
That's just the way we do things.
We use Gimp quite a bit also but mostly for making fractal images.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 02:09 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,200,077 times
Reputation: 17866
Quote:
Originally Posted by DontLookPhoto View Post
Google makes the users of Picasa share the copyrights with them and they do strip and replace data.
Copyright can only be transferred through legal means as in contracts and lawyers. The only thing Google or any of these other sites can do is license your photos based on your consent through a EULA or TOS. Generally speaking these are very broad terms that cover as many bases as possible so they can protect themselves from being sued for trivial things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 06:09 AM
 
5,453 posts, read 9,330,902 times
Reputation: 2141
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
I'll play the devils advocate.

Stripping the metadata saves a few bytes of bandwidth, probably not a very good excuse at this point in time but if you're a huge site the bandwidth saved is going to be substantial. Most image programs do this with the "save for web" option or at least used too.

Their may be some privacy concerns here and they have a blanket policy of stripping all that information. The GPS data would be the most important. I have to wonder if that led many of these sites to just strip it all out of concern over lawsuits.
This has nothing to do with bandwidth. This has to do with turning professionals work into "Orphan Works" which can be stolen and used by anyone unlicensed.

Licensing:
Quote:
LICENSING PHOTOGRAPHY

Most commercial photography is licensed, not sold, for a specific use or uses over a designated period of time. The photographer retains the copyright to all images he or she creates unless the copyright is transferred to the buyer by specific written agreement or the work qualifies as a “work for hire” under the Terms of the federal Copyright Act.

Licensing, rather than selling photography has a number of advantages for both the photographer and the client. For the client, costs are often lower to license specific rights than to purchase all rights. For example, if you only plan to use a photograph in a brochure or an annual report, why pay for the right to use it on billboards, in magazine advertising, or in an Internet ad campaign? For the photographer, the advantage is being able to license the same image for several uses to different clients over a period of time, increasing the amount of income, which can be generated from a single photograph. What if you want to make sure that your competitor doesn’t use the same photograph in their marketing materials? It is very easy to write specific terms into the license agreement, which preclude such competing uses. For example, a license can be “industry exclusive” so that an image of a building licensed to the project architect cannot be licensed to any other architectural firms. Yet it could be licensed to the general contractor or the building owner. The most common licensing arrangement for my architectural clients is an on- going blanket of rights that covers use in the architect’s portfolio, project sheets, design award submissions, direct mail, public relations releases, editorial or other A/V presentations, in-house display and internet home site.

Photography licensing fees are based on the clients intended usage. The more extensive media exposure a photograph receives, the higher the fee will be for licensing it. High-value uses, like national magazine advertisements, command the highest price. Small editorial reproductions accompanying magazine articles bring the lowest price. Brochures, project sheets and Internet use fall in the middle. There are several variables that enter the formula, including the number of copies produced and the length of time the image will be used. Prices for my assignment work include three components: the production fee, expenses and the licensing fee. (Some photographers lump the production fee and license fee together and call it a “creative fee” or (“day rate”.) When preparing an estimate, I consider factors including the assignment description, the complexity and scope of the assignment, the client’s intended use of the images, deadlines, materials, travel costs, props, crew, and my overhead when estimating what an assignment will cost. The more accurately you can describe your needs, the more accurately I can estimate the cost for the assignment.

A photograph is considered intellectual property. The photographer owns the copyright to the images he or she creates and has the exclusive right to license their use. Licensing agreements are specific with regard to use and, in general, should answer these three basic questions:

• Who will use the images?
• How and where will the images appear?
• How long will the images be used?

This information may be detailed in the Licensing & Rights Granted section of the estimate or in a separate licensing agreement that grants specific rights to commissioning clients. If several commissioning clients choose to share in the cost of an assignment, make certain that each party is provided with a written licensing agreement describing them as a licensee and detailing their rights granted. It’s important that you and your photographer agree on the scope of a license before photography has begun. Should your marketing plans change, be sure to discuss them with your photographer. Similarly, if you plan to share photographs with third parties who have not been involved in the commissioned assignment (e.g., members of the design team, contractors, consultants, product manufacturers, clients, tenants or magazine editors), permission must be obtained in writing from the photographer.

The right to use images cannot be transferred by anyone without the written consent of the copyright holder. If you’ve received photographs without written permission for their use, it is your responsibility to secure licensing rights before using them. As a rule of thumb, a good way to avoid any misunderstandings is to contact the photographer before passing along photographs. You should also advise the party receiving the images to contact the photographer directly to secure a license granting permission for their use. Any copying, reproduction, distribution, public display or creation of derivative works of images without specific permission from the photographer is a violation of Federal copyright law. Simply having physical possession of photographs, slides, prints, transparencies or digital files does not grant the right to use them.

A LICENSE is a legal agreement granting permission to exercise specified rights to a work.

A COPYRIGHT is a collection of exclusive rights owned by the creator that controls the use of creative works.

Under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, photographs automatically receive copyright protection immediately upon their creation. Absence of a copyright notice does not relieve a prospective user from the responsibility of obtaining permission from the copyright holder. In addition, altering or removing a copyright notice can result in liability under the Copyright Act and several other state and federal statutes.
The problem is that these companies feel somehow entitled to our work which they did not do. It was not their gas, time, and creativity that created all these images; yet, somehow, they feel entitled to steal them.

Its like stealing someone's car out of their driveway "just because" its parked there.

ASMP is trying to combat this for a long time now
Orphan Works:
Orphan Works | American Society of Media Photographers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 10:46 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,200,077 times
Reputation: 17866
Quote:
Originally Posted by algia View Post
This has nothing to do with bandwidth. This has to do with turning professionals work into "Orphan Works" which can be stolen and used by anyone unlicensed.
If you use an orphan work you most certainly are liable to get sued. As far as I know there has only been one exception made and that was for Google and their book scanning which was a bad decision. There is some good points made by those that want to republish those books but it shouldn't be done at the expense of the the copyright owner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 07:31 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
20,318 posts, read 37,322,097 times
Reputation: 16439
Well, just store very small copies of the original photos at such websites. For example, a photo that is sized-down, and then sized down further to display on the computer screen, or to e-mail, is a few kb in size. It looks quite nice on a computer screen, but that's it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2013, 09:47 PM
 
13,276 posts, read 21,904,706 times
Reputation: 14181
Honestly though, I think these companies most certainly should be including any supplied metadata along with the image. If they don't have the bandwidth, then they shouldn't be posting the image at all, IMHO. Stripping metadata is almost as bad as stripping watermarks. Someday I hope its illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Photography

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top