Jörg, You may not have noticed the entire statement I quoted from Baldy (I edited a couple times, maybe before you saw it). And make sure you see the quotes in my Post #302. One of your questions was this: "... So SM feeds Google with all of our images? As large as possible? If so... Why... Why I see more thumbnails for your RCPed Legacy site...." Here is my answer to that, which I partially quoted from Baldy at the bottom of my Post #300: NO, SmugMug does not feed Google images that are as large as possible. (Or they didn't, even afterthe changed RCP decision.) What Baldy actually said was that yes, Google wants images to be 800x600 (for their own user experience) but he said however "we feed them smaller than that now". He didn't specify what "smaller than that" meant, however. Here's his actual post: http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1590370&postcount=91 So yeah, could be thumbs, although back at that time I believe I started finding larger-than-thumb images in GIS from my site. I mean, at that time, even if they fed 400x300 images, that's larger than a gallery thumb. Also, Jörg, for the record, I found an extremely instructional & forgotten post from Baldy about their sudden realization about what was going on with GIS & how this site had been engineered (and for how long, Idk). Anyway, after pages of head-scratching by customers, we heard this: http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1588023&postcount=67 That tells you a lot. ExCEPT what I wanna know, which is: What's the present engineering feeding to Google (& Bing, etc.) on New & Legacy when RCP is "on"?
A more important question is why are you still using RCP? It takes less that 5 seconds using a standard browser with no extra add ons to download an RCP image. RCP is only the very mildest, softest of deterrents. You need to be limiting maximum size and watermarking (which you are doing). Remember that if you can see an image on your computer, that image is on your computer and you can access it. If I was relying on being found in Google search I wouldn't be using RCP
Even more more important question WHY is it so freaking hard for SmugMug to answer this simple question: how RCP, on New and Legacy, affecting appearance of images in GIS and other major search engines????
A more important question is why are you still using RCP? ..[snipped]... You need to be limiting maximum size and watermarking (which you are doing). Remember that if you can see an image on your computer, that image is on your computer and you can access it. If I was relying on being found in Google search I wouldn't be using RCP
Rich
Rich, I know you feel that way, but there are many reasons to have RCP, & if there weren't, it wouldn't even be an option here. Some have wished we'd call it RC "Warning" instead, which is fine w/ me, but I doubt we're gonna change a long-used acronym just by changing it here on Smug. But anyway, yes, I want to get found. But I also want to continue to help the general public realize that visual stuff online isn't all meant to be simply free for the taking, or to be used however they want to use it. That situation gets worse & worse, but even if it's difficult for us to effectively undo it, I'd like to be a part of education. Photography isn't the only kind of visual art I do, but it probably fights for its place in the art world more than most areas of visual art. I want to keep getting the message out there that, hey, this is my art & if you find a way to nab it w/o asking when it has a warning on it, you're stealing.
If people see no deterrent whatsoever, it just perpetuates the myth that everything they see online is theirs. I think Denise expressed it better than I can, right in this thread a couple yrs ago in, so please read that, & then I'd really rather not keep justifying my reasons for using RCP over & over ! I think lots of others would appreciate not having it constantly questioned too. Here's one question I ask myself: When I have my paintings or drawings posted online, would I think for one second about whether or not to RCP them? Since my answer is "No, I'd RCP them w/o a 2nd thought", then why should it be any different for my photography, which is even easier to reproduce? I've even had artists in the wider visual art-world thank me for my WMs & RCP! No, I have no false sense of protection about it. I honestly think the same rats who'd try getting around RCP would be the same rats who would simply use an image with my watermark on it! --Anna Lisa
The fact remains that "protection" is a poorly named feature....[snipped] I chose to turn right-click (non)protection on as a reminder to people that the images are copyrighted and aren't intended to be available (for free) for use other than viewing online. But I have been aware from the time that I enabled it that the images are still there to be grabbed.
Unfortunately I would guess that a good proportion of your customers thinks it is protection. ..[snip].. I've seen many many smug sites where the owner has turned protection on, made their originals available, and thought they were protected from someone stealing their images.
I'm with you on this. I still want a message on right click even though I know it is not even a small stumbling block. It serves as a reminder, nothing else. And I do want my images indexed by Google.
--- Denise
Even more more important question WHY is it so freaking hard for SmugMug to answer this simple question: how RCP, on New and Legacy, affecting appearance of images in GIS and other major search engines????
Amen. And that means also-- what is SmugMug deciding to feed search engines right now? What size images do we feed them, & is the RCP being told to stay "On" in GIS & the other image searches, or what?
Even more more important question WHY is it so freaking hard for SmugMug to answer this simple question: how RCP, on New and Legacy, affecting appearance of images in GIS and other major search engines????
Wuah, I feel we are chewing on the same question again and again. It was answered -> http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1894906&postcount=22 regardless if you on new or old. The technique is the same, the impact for images is the same.
Wuah, I feel we are chewing on the same question again and again. It was answered -> http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1894906&postcount=22 regardless if you on new or old. The technique is the same, the impact for images is the same.
That quote is very difficult to read (and I'm a native speaker of this crazy language). I can read it in two very distinctly different ways & come out with two entirely different meanings, so it really doesn't tell me anything. And it doesn't specify for New or Old, and doesn't address whether SmugMug has purposely made a new decision on this, or reversed the policy they implemented in April 2011, which was to start feeding small (less than 800x600) but non-RCP-ed images to GIS. And afaik, non of this really changes or makes a difference to regular Google Search, does it? Just GIS. Another thing we're not noting is that Google itself made some major changes recently. Idk if any of those changes are more dictatorial in what they even accept, as far as what's "fed" to them. So a much more comprehensive statement from SmugMug about current policy, much more instructional than that brief & confusing M. Bonocore statement, would be very helpful!
I thought the answer in the referenced post was quite clear.
Right click protection will block indexing in google image search but it will allow indexing for web search.
--- Denise
Well, maybe my stupidity about what indexing actually means is causing me to be able to read that in 2 entirely different ways. So the bottom line is, are you saying that they have now reversed the decision they made in April 2011 ? I referenced that history here http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1911986&postcount=300 (see Baldy's announcement quoted in the middle if needed) . [ ETA: In other words, my understanding is that since April 2011, unless they've changed something again, our images should have been seen coming up in GIS but if we had RCP turned "ON", that RCP would not [B]carry over[/B] to GIS. I also didn't think that the regular searches were affected either way by RCP, before or after the April 2011 decision. I thought it was just the [B]Image Searches[/B] (GIS, etc.) getting affected negatively before the decision to change what they "fed" GIS ]
Well, maybe my stupidity about what indexing actually means is causing me to be able to read that in 2 entirely different ways. So the bottom line is, are you saying that they have now reversed the decision they made in April 2011 ? I referenced that history here http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1911986&postcount=300 (see Baldy's announcement quoted in the middle if needed) .
It doesn't matter what happened in the past. What matters is how the system works now - and Michael's answer was quite clear.
You need to make a decision over whether you want right click protection - which doesn't protect anything - or you want the images on your smug site found in Google Image search.
That quote is very difficult to read (and I'm a native speaker of this crazy language). I can read it in two very distinctly different ways & come out with two entirely different meanings, so it really doesn't tell me anything.
Well even better. Since there are two out come, you can choose.
Maybe we better switch to German or Danish? I might be better in this languages.
And it doesn't specify for New or Old,
Why there should be a difference? Yours not there, mine never have been there in 2009 -> 2011 from Legacy and not from new SM. What else does it need to tell that the earth is not flat?
and doesn't address whether SmugMug has purposely made a new decision on this, or reversed the policy they implemented in April 2011, which was to start feeding small (less than 800x600) but non-RCP-ed images to GIS.
This might be, because it simple was not asked.
"Feeding small" means not RCPing small. Again: mine never have been there from 2009 - 2011, and I left ~ beginning 2012.
Anyway.
With the old statement from Baldy and the new from M Bonocore and my experiences with new SM I told you, your pretty simple question about RCP is answered. If not make your own test.
Right click "protection" protects from right clicking, not stealing - and it also doesn't change ethics.
It is highly deceptive, when a CEO talks in this context from a protection or "... a security back door".
Your reason (serving as a reminder) is - aehm - needless in my eyes. If people want it, they get it and they know exactly that they are copyrighted. Since the US enacted the Berne Convention Implementation Act in 1989, you don't even need to tell. even when it would be good, when copyrighting (watermarking/embedding copyright) any image. But than watermark them with your name or the name of your business/company.
The RCP subject is not worth for me to put more energy in it by reading old statements (this is the wrong thread anyway). ROFL, just I saw you found your way to the other thread.
Have fun - I am off for more important stuff -> (listening to Frank Zappa: "the Torture never stops")
It doesn't matter what happened in the past. What matters is how the system works now - and Michael's answer was quite clear.
You need to make a decision over whether you want right click protection - which doesn't protect anything - or you want the images on your smug site found in Google Image search.
--- Denise
Sorry, could you re-read my question since my edit? I didn't make part of it very clear. And I have RCP turned on for the very reasons you outlined in one of your earlier posts. Also, I am interested in whether there's been a change that we haven't been kept abreast of, especially if we had some (even if small) say in it before... I mean, they may still care about whether we care what gets fed to GIS when we have RCP on, right?
Interestingly, Denise-- Even you asked M. Bonocore to clarify his meaning in that other thread (right after he posted). And if he ever did, I haven't found it in the several pages of posts since you asked. But anyway, here is how I read that post in two completely different ways:
Bonocore's statement: "Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but not in the Google Image Search."
My 2 different interpretations: 1. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but RCP won't be enabled in the Google Image Search.
2. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but your images won't be indexed in Google Image Search.
Or, I wasn't even sure that it didn't mean this: Your RCP-enabled images will be indexed in web results, but they won't be indexed in Google Image Search. !! (and in that last interpretation, does "won't be indexed" mean "won't be found", or "will be found but not seen" or "will be seen but not able to be clicked on".) Honestly, are any of us really 100% sure? I'm so tangled up now. I just want to know what size / whatever is sent by Smug to GIS. And what they are allowing to be indexed. And what "indexing" really means in these various conversations. And I will simply say that I liked what they had decided to do starting in April 2011, and I understood what it meant for my general visibility (even if my RCP was "On") and if it has changed, I'm not happy with the change. It seems too that the pros who were surprised at the time by how it had been done would also be unhappy with a revert to that old way.
My 2 different interpretations: 1. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but RCP won't be enabled in the Google Image Search.
RCP is a local script thing (SM servers) which of course can't be taken with the images to be executed on a different site / at different servers. Also RCP is nothing which is embedded in images. Keywords, titles, captions and watermarks might be, but not a "function" of a specific server/provider/whatever.
2. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but your images won't be indexed in Google Image Search.
Obviously we are talking about this.
Translated: there might be thousand links to your images and galleries in Google web, but RCPed images will not show up in Google Images. Except as those small 100x100px thumbs.
RCP is a local script thing (SM servers) which of course can't be taken with the images to be executed on a different site / at different servers. Also RCP is nothing which is embedded in images. Keywords, titles, captions and watermarks might be, but not a "function" of a specific server/provider/whatever.
Obviously we are talking about this.
Translated: there might be thousand links to your images and galleries in Google web, but RCPed images will not show up in Google Images. Except as those small 100x100px thumbs.
I guess a definition of "web results" would've been helpful a long time ago.
And a definition of "indexed".
And a definition of "crawled". These terms all get thrown around, even by the CEO it seems, & some of us (me) only have a vague meaning attached, while others may be attaching very specific meanings.
So really it seems to me that you're saying Bonocore's meaning was actually my 3rd one: Your RCP-enabled images will be indexed in web results, but they won't be indexed in Google Image Search. Not that I still know for sure what that means. But if it's the 3rd, it sounds like it means they did change policy. But when? And are all images, whether Legacy or New, being treated the same? I'm not sure why it seems so odd to want to know that. It matters. Period.
If people see no deterrent whatsoever, it just perpetuates the myth that everything they see online is theirs
I do agree with that and it is a good reason to do it.
The other problem here is that Google are moving the goal posts all the time and as well so I suspect what they index one day they may throw away the next. I've been keenly following the indexing of the new site I put up and I discovered a whole gallery of images that appeared in image search one day and disappeared three days later without any action on my part . Add to that the confusion over whether we mean web indexing or image indexing and it gets even more difficult to discuss. What I'm sure of is that I want images to appear in google image search, not just web search, so I don't RCP. Just for fun now google seems to show some image search results as part of the web results so it's all getting even more confusing.
Good luck
Rich
edit: and just for reference here is how I interpret the terms you have listed above:
crawled: Google has visited your web page to see what is on it. Note that Google Image search and Google web search are seperate and do seperate visits to the page
indexed: After visiting your page google decides it is good enough to keep and stores it in it's results ready to be found by someone in a search
web results: The results of a google search if you go to www.google.com and type something in. A google image search result (GIS) is different as is the result of going to images.google.com and typing a search term in
I guess a definition of "web results" would've been helpful a long time ago.
In a way, yes. But sorry and with all respect, you don't really expect that a definition has to be given in here?
Those terms are not SM specific and if terms like (google) "web results/links", "crawling" and "indexing" sounds nuts for you, you should have consult Google or http://www.giyf.com/ long time ago and after that get back here for clarifying how all this stuff regarding SM works.
Your keywords appear in the <meta> tags for the image - as well as on the page where the photo is displayed. The /keywords path is an alternative way to navigate your images, but it does not help with SEO - in fact it actually creates confusion because many of those pages end up being re-directs to other pages or send them on a nearly endless crawling expedition as they try to navigate through a ton of "virtual pages". So, while it may be a nice way for a human-user to browse through your content, it is not at all ideal for a web crawler to take that path.
As you can see there are thousands of links on that page and clicking any of them will take you to another page where additional keywords can be added or deleted in nearly endless combinations. That means the bots are spending all this time crawling these essentially spam links and not focusing on the primary photography pages.
Hope this helps!
- Greg
HI GREG, Is there a way to remove all the numeric values in this keyword page? If so, will it remove all the numeric keywords on the full website? If not, how can I do so?
HI GREG, Is there a way to remove all the numeric values in this keyword page? If so, will it remove all the numeric keywords on the full website? If not, how can I do so?
You may add, remove or edit keywords to photos via the organizer and going to one of your galleries. There, you can select the photos you'd like to edit and click on the wrench button > title, caption and keywords tool. That would allow you to edit the keywords for the selected photos.
Bulk keyword editing only works via this tool for a specific gallery. There's not an option to edit keywords in bulk via the keywords page.
Of course, you may click on any keyword to pull up the keyword page for it, select a photo to view it big and then you could edit title, caption and keywords directly below the photo. This works for one photo at a time.
If one keyword has a lot of photos, you could also consider setting up a smart gallery for it. That way, you could use the organizer to edit the photos for this keyword in bulk via the organizer.
You may add, remove or edit keywords to photos via the organizer and going to one of your galleries. There, you can select the photos you'd like to edit and click on the wrench button > title, caption and keywords tool. That would allow you to edit the keywords for the selected photos.
Bulk keyword editing only works via this tool for a specific gallery. There's not an option to edit keywords in bulk via the keywords page.
Of course, you may click on any keyword to pull up the keyword page for it, select a photo to view it big and then you could edit title, caption and keywords directly below the photo. This works for one photo at a time.
If one keyword has a lot of photos, you could also consider setting up a smart gallery for it. That way, you could use the organizer to edit the photos for this keyword in bulk via the organizer.
Thank you Sebastian for the info. This is the same info that I received when I emailed the help desk directly.
Given the number of numeric keywords I would have to remove this could take days to do.
In the past I had the same issue and the help desk was able to easily remove all numeric keywords on their end. I've already asked them a couple of times and have said they couldn't do it. Someone else on this forum as confirmed that they were able to do this for him as well. He mentioned I should try to contact them again.
For the last few days I've been working on optimizing my site and know that numeric keywords hinder SEO. If I am unable to find an easier solution to this I may have to consider rebuilding my site on a different platform. Given the choice of spending days fixing something SmugMug implemented (the keyword extractor option) or rebuilding elsewhere, is the current fork in my road.
Anywho, thanks again. I will try contacting them again later today.
I'm not aware of us having any special tool. I've checked at bit in our past internal messages and from what I can tell, on the old SmugMug we sometimes used the bulk tools for keyword galleries that were available on the old SmugMug to help remove keywords. This is not a tool available anymore as far as I know. So at this point in time, the quickest option may be to use smart rules to help you remove these keywords.
I'm not aware of us having any special tool. I've checked at bit in our past internal messages and from what I can tell, on the old SmugMug we sometimes used the bulk tools for keyword galleries that were available on the old SmugMug to help remove keywords. This is not a tool available anymore as far as I know. So at this point in time, the quickest option may be to use smart rules to help you remove these keywords.
Yes, as a matter of fact, the past numeric clean up was done on the old smugmug.
It's unfortunate they on longer have this tool.
And the smart rules gallery only allows 5 rules at a time which really doesn't help much.
I'm really not sure what to do now. Either I spend hours cleaning something Smugmug implemented without my full understanding of it, or spend hours rebuilding elsewhere.
Comments
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Rich
If people see no deterrent whatsoever, it just perpetuates the myth that everything they see online is theirs. I think Denise expressed it better than I can, right in this thread a couple yrs ago in, so please read that, & then I'd really rather not keep justifying my reasons for using RCP over & over
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Right click protection will block indexing in google image search but it will allow indexing for web search.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
You need to make a decision over whether you want right click protection - which doesn't protect anything - or you want the images on your smug site found in Google Image search.
--- Denise
Musings & ramblings at https://denisegoldberg.blogspot.com
Maybe we better switch to German or Danish? I might be better in this languages.
Why there should be a difference? Yours not there, mine never have been there in 2009 -> 2011 from Legacy and not from new SM. What else does it need to tell that the earth is not flat? This might be, because it simple was not asked.
"Feeding small" means not RCPing small. Again: mine never have been there from 2009 - 2011, and I left ~ beginning 2012.
Anyway.
With the old statement from Baldy and the new from M Bonocore and my experiences with new SM I told you, your pretty simple question about RCP is answered. If not make your own test.
Right click "protection" protects from right clicking, not stealing - and it also doesn't change ethics.
It is highly deceptive, when a CEO talks in this context from a protection or "... a security back door".
Your reason (serving as a reminder) is - aehm - needless in my eyes. If people want it, they get it and they know exactly that they are copyrighted. Since the US enacted the Berne Convention Implementation Act in 1989, you don't even need to tell. even when it would be good, when copyrighting (watermarking/embedding copyright) any image. But than watermark them with your name or the name of your business/company.
The RCP subject is not worth for me to put more energy in it by reading old statements (this is the wrong thread anyway). ROFL, just I saw you found your way to the other thread.
Have fun - I am off for more important stuff -> (listening to Frank Zappa: "the Torture never stops")
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Bonocore's statement: "Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but not in the Google Image Search."
My 2 different interpretations: 1. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but RCP won't be enabled in the Google Image Search.
2. Your images will be indexed in the web results with RCP enabled, but your images won't be indexed in Google Image Search.
Or, I wasn't even sure that it didn't mean this: Your RCP-enabled images will be indexed in web results, but they won't be indexed in Google Image Search. !! (and in that last interpretation, does "won't be indexed" mean "won't be found", or "will be found but not seen" or "will be seen but not able to be clicked on".) Honestly, are any of us really 100% sure? I'm so tangled up now. I just want to know what size / whatever is sent by Smug to GIS. And what they are allowing to be indexed. And what "indexing" really means in these various conversations. And I will simply say that I liked what they had decided to do starting in April 2011, and I understood what it meant for my general visibility (even if my RCP was "On") and if it has changed, I'm not happy with the change. It seems too that the pros who were surprised at the time by how it had been done would also be unhappy with a revert to that old way.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
Translated: there might be thousand links to your images and galleries in Google web, but RCPed images will not show up in Google Images. Except as those small 100x100px thumbs.
I guess a definition of "web results" would've been helpful a long time ago.
And a definition of "indexed".
And a definition of "crawled". These terms all get thrown around, even by the CEO it seems, & some of us (me) only have a vague meaning attached, while others may be attaching very specific meanings.
So really it seems to me that you're saying Bonocore's meaning was actually my 3rd one: Your RCP-enabled images will be indexed in web results, but they won't be indexed in Google Image Search. Not that I still know for sure what that means. But if it's the 3rd, it sounds like it means they did change policy. But when? And are all images, whether Legacy or New, being treated the same? I'm not sure why it seems so odd to want to know that. It matters. Period.
DayBreak, my Folk Music Group (some free mp3s!) http://daybreakfolk.com
I do agree with that and it is a good reason to do it.
The other problem here is that Google are moving the goal posts all the time and as well so I suspect what they index one day they may throw away the next. I've been keenly following the indexing of the new site I put up and I discovered a whole gallery of images that appeared in image search one day and disappeared three days later without any action on my part
Good luck
Rich
edit: and just for reference here is how I interpret the terms you have listed above:
crawled: Google has visited your web page to see what is on it. Note that Google Image search and Google web search are seperate and do seperate visits to the page
indexed: After visiting your page google decides it is good enough to keep and stores it in it's results ready to be found by someone in a search
web results: The results of a google search if you go to www.google.com and type something in. A google image search result (GIS) is different as is the result of going to images.google.com and typing a search term in
Those terms are not SM specific and if terms like (google) "web results/links", "crawling" and "indexing" sounds nuts for you, you should have consult Google or http://www.giyf.com/ long time ago and after that get back here for clarifying how all this stuff regarding SM works.
Goto ->
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/70897?hl=en
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/knowing-google-images-basics.html
http://ppcblog.com/how-google-works/
btw, just for the records: even when "GIS" was used in the past by myself a lot, we are not talking about Google Image (reverse) Search here.
HI GREG, Is there a way to remove all the numeric values in this keyword page? If so, will it remove all the numeric keywords on the full website? If not, how can I do so?
http://www.maximilianimaging.com/keyword
As you can see I have a ton on my website and have heard that this hinders SEO.
Can you please advise.
Many thanks,
Max
Interiors Events Headshots Scapes
Bulk keyword editing only works via this tool for a specific gallery. There's not an option to edit keywords in bulk via the keywords page.
Of course, you may click on any keyword to pull up the keyword page for it, select a photo to view it big and then you could edit title, caption and keywords directly below the photo. This works for one photo at a time.
If one keyword has a lot of photos, you could also consider setting up a smart gallery for it. That way, you could use the organizer to edit the photos for this keyword in bulk via the organizer.
SmugMug Support Hero
Thank you Sebastian for the info. This is the same info that I received when I emailed the help desk directly.
Given the number of numeric keywords I would have to remove this could take days to do.
In the past I had the same issue and the help desk was able to easily remove all numeric keywords on their end. I've already asked them a couple of times and have said they couldn't do it. Someone else on this forum as confirmed that they were able to do this for him as well. He mentioned I should try to contact them again.
For the last few days I've been working on optimizing my site and know that numeric keywords hinder SEO. If I am unable to find an easier solution to this I may have to consider rebuilding my site on a different platform. Given the choice of spending days fixing something SmugMug implemented (the keyword extractor option) or rebuilding elsewhere, is the current fork in my road.
Anywho, thanks again. I will try contacting them again later today.
Max
Interiors Events Headshots Scapes
SmugMug Support Hero
Yes, as a matter of fact, the past numeric clean up was done on the old smugmug.
It's unfortunate they on longer have this tool.
And the smart rules gallery only allows 5 rules at a time which really doesn't help much.
I'm really not sure what to do now. Either I spend hours cleaning something Smugmug implemented without my full understanding of it, or spend hours rebuilding elsewhere.
In either case, i'm not happy.
M
Interiors Events Headshots Scapes