Please explain the 'no-edit' rationale when asking for help

[The_Traveler]

I am befuddled when posters ask for actual editing help - rather than just comments on an image - but don't allow editing of the image by the respondants.

My own response when confronted by this is usually just to skip over the post for the simple reason I don't want to start thinking about the picture, come up with some suggestions and then have to try to express the suggestions only in words. Since, when I comment on a picture, I often download the picture, play with it a while and then respond; I don't want to do the work and then throw it away.

Without attempting any covert nastiness, (when I try to be nasty, I do it overtly) I just don't understand and I am asking those who take this position to explain it me.

 

[shorty6049]

i agree with you. I've always been fine with others editing my photos, and never really understood why others dont want people doing it. Its not like that somehow de-values their photo... but i'd like to hear from someone who has the red letters for their opinion

 

[tinfoil_hearts]

I agree. Though I havent been here much I know enough to think that I know what you are talking about. When people really need/want help, they should at least allow you to edi that picture, and that picture only.

If they do have the "My Pictures Are NOT OK to Edit" sign, at least let the person trying to help edit the picture and show it to you only.

Maybe they should put a post at the bottom also that says "If you wish to re-post this picture, you must only post it here and no where else and you can not claim it as your own" So that way, they're getting the security they want but knowing that if people want to not obey the rules, then they have a reason to be mad (and possibly press charges?).

 

[Corry]

Unfortunately, some people have gotten burned when it comes to allowing editing of their photos.

I personally put a photo up and asked for editing help a few months back....only to find that person had reposted my edit (and it was a horrid edit) on Deviant Art. Yes, they gave me credit for the original photo, but the edit absolutely was NOT something that made my photography look good at all.

However, I must admit, I'm not sure how someone can ask for actual editing help without allowing anyone to edit for them.

I no longer allow editing on my photos due to what happened with me, other than very specific occasions.

 

[xfloggingkylex]

corry, I understand what you mean, but couldn't we just impliment a "dont post my image outside of this website" rule for the entire forum. The way I am thinking, if someone really wanted to post an edit of an image you have up, the little "It is NOT ok to edit my pictures" tag isn't going to make a difference. Besides, allowed to edit or not, I dont think anyones pictures should be posted by another person outside of this site anyways, unless given permission and it should be on a case by case basis, meaning you have to ask each and every time you want to repost it.

Of course none of this will stop someone who really wants to "steal" your image.

I've never really understood the NOT ok to edit idea, but your situation does make since.

 

[RMThompson]

I agree with The Traveler. If someone REALLY wanted to steal any photograph posted online they could without permission to edit it, even with right click disabled. We, as photographers, take that risk every single time we post something online.

That being said, this is a forum made up of mostly intelligent well behaving people, and most of us even have links to our personal sites somewhere on our profile/sig, and share this all the time. If anyone were to try to take credit for the photo, we'd know about it.

Regardless, it is someone's choice, and rightfully so, so I ignore said people... as you do The Traveler, and I am sure they will get the point with an empty thread.

Then again my threads are always empty, but I have a feeling it's because I smell bad or my pics are REALLY bad. Either way.

 

[Kingpatzer]

Another site I'm on has a very simple rule:

All pictures are assumed to be copyright of the original artist, but posting an image on the site gives explicit permission to alter/repost the image back to that site only.

It is in their terms of usage, and it works very well.

Someone posting an image to another site is a violation of copyright anyway, and the "my pictures are/aren't ok to edit" tag doesn't change that one way or the other.

 

[EOS_JD]

i agree with the OP. I edited an image (although didn't see the "no edit" below the sig and got a kicking from the poster of the image. i think he reaslised he was a bit quick as I deleted the image right away and apologised but I too find it hard to give help on critique or editing without trying it myself first.

Tough one but like the idea that if you post, it's ok to edit within only this forum.

 

[Corry]

corry, I understand what you mean, but couldn't we just impliment a "dont post my image outside of this website" rule for the entire forum. The way I am thinking, if someone really wanted to post an edit of an image you have up, the little "It is NOT ok to edit my pictures" tag isn't going to make a difference. Besides, allowed to edit or not, I dont think anyones pictures should be posted by another person outside of this site anyways, unless given permission and it should be on a case by case basis, meaning you have to ask each and every time you want to repost it.

Of course none of this will stop someone who really wants to "steal" your image.

I've never really understood the NOT ok to edit idea, but your situation does make since.

I do believe it's actually already in the rules...I'd have to look to make sure.

The 'ok to edit'/'not ok to edit' thing is there because some individuals don't want their photos edited at all on any site, but I also think it helps to drive the point home when it comes to people not wanting their stuff reposted on other sites.

Yes, I do know that anyone that wants to steal a photo can do it. Sucks that people sink that low.

 

[The_Traveler]

I personally put a photo up and asked for editing help a few months back....only to find that person had reposted my edit (and it was a horrid edit) on Deviant Art.

However, I must admit, I'm not sure how someone can ask for actual editing help without allowing anyone to edit for them.

Interestingly, since people must host their images somewhere to show them on the site, edits get posted on public forums and then hot-linked.

Perhaps a partial solution is to provide one single gallery here on TPF that is accessible to all members that must be used to host reworks only for onsite linking.

 

[Corry]

Interestingly, since people must host their images somewhere to show them on the site, edits get posted on public forums and then hot-linked.

Perhaps a partial solution is to provide one single gallery here on TPF that is accessible to all members that must be used to host reworks only for onsite linking.

I don't think that most photo hosting sites are set up as forums, are they? I mean, I know some of them HAVE forums....

...but I use photo bucket...I've never used the forum part of it before. And I can set my account to private, as well.

 

[The_Traveler]

No, not as forums.

It would keep people from having to maintain a public and private space. (I host at image-shack and I don't even know if I can have a private gallery in addition to my own public gallery. I have marked images private but have never tested whether private images can be hot-linked.)

It is as much a psychological issue as anything else. Just to assert in another way that edits should be close-held.

 

[terri]

The "OK or NOT OK to edit" tag line is meant to accompany a member throughout the forum. Granted, if a member posts an image in the Crit forum and then refuses to allow editing, it might be difficult to oblige them! You are under no obligation to help anyone who is setting up this roadblock. So yes - skip it over.

Chase set this up so the casual uploaded image will not be played with throughout the Galleries or elsewhere. There have been numerous instances where a member would post a shot in a Gallery, only to have members respond with: "Nice shot - take a look at this edit I did, I think it looks better, what do you think?" :shock: So the message is there to notify members in advance whether or not this type of reply might offend a poster.

I don't want anyone to edit my stuff, either - but if I were posting in the Crtique forum, or anywhere where I asked for help, I would accompany THAT particular post with a special "OTE" - Okay to Edit - in the same thread. If I didn't, I'd have no one to blame but myself if I got ignored!

It's just simple communication.

I am befuddled when posters ask for actual editing help - rather than just comments on an image - but don't allow editing of the image by the respondants.

My own response when confronted by this is usually just to skip over the post for the simple reason I don't want to start thinking about the picture, come up with some suggestions and then have to try to express the suggestions only in words. Since, when I comment on a picture, I often download the picture, play with it a while and then respond; I don't want to do the work and then throw it away.

Without attempting any covert nastiness, (when I try to be nasty, I do it overtly) I just don't understand and I am asking those who take this position to explain it me.

 

[The_Traveler]

The "OK or NOT OK to edit" tag line is meant to accompany a member throughout the forum. Granted, if a member posts an image in the Crit forum and then refuses to allow editing, it might be difficult to oblige them! You are under no obligation to help anyone who is setting up this roadblock. So yes - skip it over.

I don't want anyone to edit my stuff, either - but if I were posting in the Crtique forum, or anywhere where I asked for help, I would accompany THAT particular post with a special "OTE" - Okay to Edit - in the same thread. If I didn't, I'd have no one to blame but myself if I got ignored!

It's just simple communication.

Yes, I do understand the reasons for the NOTE tags and my option to skip.
I was just plain curious about the reasoning of those who post in Critique but don't allow editing.

 

[The_Traveler]

I just went through the first page of critiques and sent PMs to 4 or 5 people who don't allow edits asking for their input on this thread.