Selling and Protecting photos

ang · Sep 6, 2005

I understand how I can get a copyright for my photos and images. When sending copies of photos and digital images to potential buyers, do you send a copyright notice along with the photos/images? Is that enought to protect the images you've sent?

Also, for those of you who have web sites, how do you protect the images on the web site from being copied or downloaded?

ksmattfish · Sep 7, 2005

It's probably a good idea to include a copyright notice. Many people do not understand intellectual property.

My website images have a max dimension of 500 pixels, so hopefully that would limit the print size to 2" or less. A watermark is probably better, but I hate the way they look.

Meysha · Sep 7, 2005

You'll never stop people stealing photos from the web. But what you can do is make the quality bad enough so that they're impossible to print nicely. Reduce the dpi, physically make the photo smaller and compress it as much as you can.

ang · Sep 7, 2005

Matt,

What do you mean by a "watermark"?

JamesMartin · Sep 8, 2005

A watermark is a half see through type sign stuck over the top of your pic. Means that your name (or whatever) will be over the top so no-one else can clame it. Pretty easy to do in nearly any graphic app (Photoshop, Paintshop, Fireworks, even things like Flash).

On this topic though, I have the same question regarding printed photos (like a portfolio or demo shots for a client). How do other people deal with the idea that people might scan or whatever shots from your printed porfolio? Water mark them all??

- James

ang · Sep 8, 2005

Matt,

Thanks.

Just thinking-- can't someone with photoshop techniques, get rid of the watermark and still utilize the photo?

You mentioned 500 pixels limitation your website for pics. Do you simply change the pixels in photoshop prior to placing them on your site?

You also brought up a good point about prints. Seems like we're putting a LOT of trust in the people we are sending our photos to?

Ang

SLOShooter · Sep 8, 2005

It's really hard to get watermarks out if they are place across the main subject of the photo. You can try and clone them out but once that data is gone, replaced by the water mark, it's gone and there is no way to get it back.

That being said if the mark is not right on the main subject, careful cropping might leave a photo intact and printable, or if the water mark goes across something realativly non-complex, like big patches of solid colors it might be possible to clone out. It'd be a lot of work though.

I think your best bet is reducing the quality of the photo and reducing the size so that a decent print can not be made from it even if they rip it right off the site.

ang · Sep 17, 2005

Probably a stupid question, but, if I reduce the dpi and send or copy the image to someone, can't they simply increase the dpi to a more printable version?

Hertz van Rental · Sep 17, 2005

Not realy. The quality will be naff - but that is sometimes no deterrent.
To be honest, if people are going to steal your images then they will steal them whatever you do.
The reality of copyright infringement is that, despite the laws, you can rarely do anything when it happens.
First you have to discover that it has happened.
Then you have to identify the person/company that has done it.
Then you have to discover what country they are in.
Then you have to find out which country you have to take the legal action in and what their laws are.
And that's before you can even send them a letter about it.
The task takes up so much time and can cost a fortune so it is usually best to just grit your teeth and put up with it.
I've had it happen to me on quite a number of ocassions, even before the digital age.
The last one was a couple of years back. I just happened to see a postcard on sale and recognised it as a section of a book cover I had done in the 80's. I bought one but there was no info on it so I asked the shopkeeper where he got it from. I went to his supplier who said they got them from a wholesaler, who in turn bought them as job lots....
After a day of this I decided to just go home and stick the postcard on my wall. It's still there to remind me to not give a damn.

1mask · Sep 18, 2005

If you could work it out, or ask someone else to do it for you, you could use an application to create a java applet or Flash animation thats just a still, that would display your images on a web site. This would stop people from being able to "right-click" and save the images to their computer.

I've seen that on a lot of websites people have added some code to their site which does not allow the viewer to use the right mouse button. It simply comes up "copyright 2005" or whatever. What these people forget is that if you can actually see the image on your browser then the image has been downloaded onto their computer in a temporary folder somewhere. All it takes is a little searching on their computers temporary internet folders to find the image they wanted to copy. Voila...

Erm, hope I've helped somewhat!

Oh, and the resolution thing... Below is an example of an image which has had the DPI reduced, saved and then increased to the original size (not a brilliant example but all I could find at 01:05am! 72DPI image reduced to 12DPI, saved then resized to 72DPI again). It basically shows that if you reduce your images DPI and send it to someone, if they increase it back to what it originally was, it'll look pants.

The image on the left is the original 72DPI photo. The one on the right is the image reduced to 12DPI, saved and then resized back to 72DPI again. This image was taken at Six Flags: New Jersey (Jackson) in the new GOlden Kingdom area.

JamesMartin · Sep 20, 2005

Just a note on the whole Java/flash idea... great idea, and as you said people use it alot.
JavaScripting to stop right click is easy, and effective against people who are new to the whole internet thingy, by viewing source code you can find a pics original location, or like mentioned, temp files.

Flash is much more secure than that. It embeds the image and therefore the original will not be on the server. Completely un-stealable.....for the above mentioned techniques... although still to people who know what they are doing, 30seconds later you have the pic...

I think that it comes down to, like Hertz van Rental said.. nothing is safe, it will happen in the end.

- James

DLL_4ever · Sep 23, 2005

/\ dont forget about the Print Screen technique... even if you use flash/java to show you're images, people can still easily steal them.. There is not really anything you can do to stop people from stealing images, the only thing you can do is make sure that they dont want to steal them, by for example, reducing their size and/or quality..

SLOShooter · Sep 23, 2005

I think that using a lower quality image in flash or whatever is a good solution. I mean if you think about it, so what if they steal the image. They can't print it well enough to sell prints of it. They can't sell it to an AD agency. They probably will never sell any copies on a stock account. So all the major money makers are gone.

They could chop it up and use it as stock for themselves, but then they're going to be chopping it up or using it in some context where you wouldn't get the credit anyway.

So to be technical, sure, once you put an image on the web it is pretty much impossible to stop someone from stealing it. However, if your smart about it are you really going to lose that much revenue from it? I would argue not.

craig · Sep 23, 2005

The dpi solution seems like a good one. Maybe the only viable one. Sure no one will be able to print it, but what is too stop them from using the image on their own web site. I also take the sort of nieve "I do not care" approach. I mean to say that you can get caught up protecting something that probably will not be stolen. The possibilities for theft are endless. Just concentrate on quality work. It has worked for me.

It has been my experience that potential clients are the least of your worries. Commercial clients generally understand copyright laws. They have a product to produce and do not want any trouble. Personal buyers are looking for high quality work for their home. Somehow I doubt that stealing the photo has ever crossed their minds.

May also depend on your work. Photos of half naked models may be more attractive to thieves as opposed to product shots.

Christie Photo · Sep 24, 2005

I can't swear to this, but didn't Kodak include something in the emulsion of pro papers that spoiled scans? Little gold flecks? Somthing like that?

I recently spoke with a friend who prints a series of tiny black dots over his images for web posting. I haven't tried this yet, but it sounds like it might be a good soultion.