Sniped pictures

OnTheMarQPhotos · August 25, 2007

HELP!

Ok, I have a problem. We were recently contacted via email by a gentleman within our sport asking to use one of our photos on some promotional flyers with credit given to us. WooHoo for us! (we thought)

We were happy to oblige and asked which photo. At that point, he indicated that he "pulled" the photo off our smugmug site and "I may need a high res, 300 dpi (or as high as you shot it) version if the place tells me when I sent isn’t high enough quality. I used the Jump pic from our last course in Cortez, cropped it and cleaned up the color a bit, I guess I’ll just have to wait and see what they say, the CD should be to the place Monday or Tuesday. Thanks Again."

We were a little taken aback because we right click protected, watermarked, etc. When we asked where he got the image he stated "Off your website... I downloaded it and made it my wallpaper at work."

What do we do now? I mean, really! I DO NOT want to give this guy the rights to our photo. If he had asked before he sniped it, it might have been a different issue. Then, he crops it and cut off our water mark. I'm ticked! :pissed (We didn't have the "across the pic watermark" because we wanted to be able to give the guys purchasing the photos to print from the site as a clean shot for their sponsors, family, etc. Now I guess we'll have to.

: )

Any suggestions on what actions can be taken? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

gus · August 25, 2007

OnTheMarQPhotos wrote:

HELP!

Ok, I have a problem. We were recently contacted via email by a gentleman within our sport asking to use one of our photos on some promotional flyers with credit given to us. WooHoo for us! (we thought)

We were happy to oblige and asked which photo. At that point, he indicated that he "pulled" the photo off our smugmug site and "I may need a high res, 300 dpi (or as high as you shot it) version if the place tells me when I sent isn’t high enough quality. I used the Jump pic from our last course in Cortez, cropped it and cleaned up the color a bit, I guess I’ll just have to wait and see what they say, the CD should be to the place Monday or Tuesday. Thanks Again."

We were a little taken aback because we right click protected, watermarked, etc. When we asked where he got the image he stated "Off your website... I downloaded it and made it my wallpaper at work."

What do we do now? I mean, really! I DO NOT want to give this guy the rights to our photo. If he had asked before he sniped it, it might have been a different issue. Then, he crops it and cut off our water mark. I'm ticked! :pissed (We didn't have the "across the pic watermark" because we wanted to be able to give the guys purchasing the photos to print from the site as a clean shot for their sponsors, family, etc. Now I guess we'll have to. : )

Any suggestions on what actions can be taken? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance!

If you like...PM me the link to the page & i will see if i can grab a photo from it and let you know. Just always good to make sure of the info before putting a round in the breech.

OnTheMarQPhotos · August 26, 2007

gus wrote:

If you like...PM me the link to the page & i will see if i can grab a photo from it and let you know. Just always good to make sure of the info before putting a round in the breech.

Well, after a very very long call with the guy, we found out he's an IT guy and hacked our site to get the pics. I'm not sure where it's going to go now with us. Other than we're pretty ticked. I know as far as our sport...he's about to see a lot of trouble.

He seemed to think that if he could see the picture, he's allowed to hack a site and get it. When we explained as if he was going into 7-11, grabbing a soda, and walking out without paying he said he never thought about it that way. And when asked if he thought it was "right" when he had to go to the trouble of hacking the site, he didn't say a word.

I appreciate the offer to check the site. Go for it. Mabye we missed something. http://onthemarqphotos.smugmug.com/

So far, the only way (other than hacking by 25 year old morons

) that we've found someone can get the pics are by using a program like SnagIt or another "grab" program.

dangin · August 26, 2007

i will tell you that right-click protecting your galleries will only prevent the most inept of surfers from nabbing images off of websites. with some browsers or spider programs, it's downright childs play. there's honestly little that can be done about it other than making sure you drop a very noticable and difficult to photoshop-out watermark on the image.

and yes, i can go on your site (as well as my own sm site) and even though they're right-click protected, i can nab any image i want. yes, they're the actual images from your site, not some snag-it screenshots. and yes, i'm in IT too, but the info on how to do it is readily available on the net. if you want me to prove it, just give me permission to repost a couple of your images. it's kinda like ethical hacking, i don't do it unless i'm invited to.

aktse · August 26, 2007

It's very easy to grab a photo and it doesn't require much hacking... just a bit of knowledge of how systems work. It doesn't mean that it's right, but most people don't know that it's illegal.

There isn't any easy way around it. You just have to accept the fact that photos will be taken, but you can help your cause by limited the sizes (lock originals and large sizes) and putting up a big, ugly watermark that can't be cropped. If someone does use the photos (i.e. myspace, facebook, etc.), treat it as free advertisement.

There are links about photog's resources and rights. I hope this helps...

devbobo · August 26, 2007

Please don't be so liberal with the use of the word "hacked", your site wasn't hacked.

If the guy had to crop the photo to get rid of the watermark, the biggest image size that he got was something like a 800x600. Which would look pretty crap as a desktop wallpaper on any decent resolution screen anyway.

Your best bet is to follow these instructions to make a larger transparent watermark which you can place over the centre of your photo.

As metioned previously in this thread, the right click copyright message should only be viewed as a deterrent, it's only going to stop the casual internet user (maybe)...not someone who wants the photo. It should also be mentioned that once someone views an image on their computer, regardless of whether right-click protection is enabled, the photo has been downloaded locally to that person's computer ...and is accessible, if they know where to look.

Cheers,

David

bsvirginian · August 26, 2007

Wow!!
bsvirginian

devbobo wrote:

Please don't be so liberal with the use of the word "hacked", your site wasn't hacked.

If the guy had to crop the photo to get rid of the watermark, the biggest image size that he got was something like a 800x600. Which would look pretty crap as a desktop wallpaper on any decent resolution screen anyway.

Your best bet is to follow these instructions to make a larger transparent watermark which you can place over the centre of your photo.

As metioned previously in this thread, the right click copyright message should only be viewed as a deterrent, it's only going to stop the casual internet user (maybe)...not someone who wants the photo. It should also be mentioned that once someone views an image on their computer, regardless of whether right-click protection is enabled, the photo has been downloaded locally to that person's computer ...and is accessible, if they know where to look.

Cheers,

David

devbobo · August 26, 2007

bsvirginian wrote:

Wow!!
bsvirginian

ok perhaps that was harsh...but people need to understand that the whole right-click protection thing is not the security blanket that they think it is.

2whlrcr · August 26, 2007

I guess I'm one of the dumb ones too. I thought I was protected with the "right click protection". I don't know how to access these photos from my hardrive either.

I'm only doing this as a hobby and if I find out that people are stealing more photos than they are buying, then I'll just quit.

OnTheMarQPhotos · August 26, 2007

devbobo wrote:

Please don't be so liberal with the use of the word "hacked", your site wasn't hacked.

"Hacked" was the term he used when we spoke with him on the phone. I guess I should have clarified that before anyone got ticky.

I think the thing that got to us the most is that the guy sniped it THEN asked permission to use it after he had sent the info to the printers. Then had the nerve to act like he was surprised that he'd done something wrong.

Although we detest the idea of the huge watermark, I guess that is something we will have to do. I know that it is possible to easily get images from the web, with and without software. We were just trying to make it a little easier on our clients to order images for print without the mondo watermark. Such is life...there's always someone that has to screw things up for everyone else.

Thanks to everyone for the advice and help.

devbobo · August 26, 2007

it's true...it sucks that he didn't ask in the first place and that large watermarks are needed...but in the end you have to protect yourself.

I am trying to track down a post Mike Lane did about making this watermark, which is pretty good imo.

moose135 · August 26, 2007

I'm not sure where you are at with this guy following your conversation with him. Is he still trying to use your image without permission? If so, can you find out where he is going for printing? Contact the printer and tell them you hold the copyright for the photo, and it is being used without your permission. If the printer is at all ethical, or fears legal action, that should keep it out of their flyer.

Angelo · August 26, 2007

man, why are you sweating the small stuff?

the guy contacted you expressing interest in your work! (asking for a hi-res image proves his screen snag is useless)

instead of wasting time castigating him and worrying about things you can't control, thank him for his interest in your work and focus on making a sale.

sheeeeeesh!

scratch

mike_k · August 26, 2007

devbobo wrote:

ok perhaps that was harsh...but people need to understand that the whole right-click protection thing is NOT the security blanket that they think it is.

Fixed your post...

SloYerRoll · August 26, 2007

Angelo wrote:

man, why are you sweating the small stuff?

the guy contacted you expressing interest in your work! (asking for a hi-res image proves his screen snag is useless)

instead of wasting time castigating him and worrying about things you can't control, thank him for his interest in your work and focus on making a sale.

sheeeeeesh! scratch

That sums it all up boys and girls!

OnTheMarQPhotos · August 26, 2007

Angelo wrote:

man, why are you sweating the small stuff?

the guy contacted you expressing interest in your work! (asking for a hi-res image proves his screen snag is useless)

instead of wasting time castigating him and worrying about things you can't control, thank him for his interest in your work and focus on making a sale.

sheeeeeesh! scratch

I'm not sweating it. There is a history here. He asked us before this comeptition if we would take photos of his team. We told him sure and we all agreed to finish up the details when we all met at the event.

Once we get to the event, he has changed his mind and decides he no longer needs for us to cover the event for his team. One of his guys is going to "snap a few" for him. We say ok. No biggie. That's the way things are.

Then, after the fact, we had a great shot of his team in a jump...guess which pic he snipes?

I think we have a different set up from a lot of the photogs here. Most of these people we have known for 10-15 years, and we are pretty much the only ones in our sport who offer the shots and set ups we do.

This guy searched us out in the beginning, then screwed us. That's what we're ticked over. We have a decent enough client base that we're happy to turn away a guy that renigs and then snipes the shot.

bham · August 27, 2007

You may want to see this thread about a similar "theft" issue.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=62279

but I also suggest using a watermark (100x100 - 200x200 pixels) at a 45 degree angle with fade between 50-70%, tiled. This allows the details of the image to be seen with no chance to snip and crop and still get something someone might want to use. See the example here

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=560300&postcount=19

it is just one post in the above thread but an example of how part of the image could be used with a center watermark, for those wanting to avoid that possibility.

Sniped pictures

Comments