Discussion in 'Photographic Discussions' started by Flatland2D, Feb 3, 2008.
What if one really stole some PRO's pictures, and dumped them the the DCIM folder of the CF card?
I don't see what's the big deal. Many other labs are heading the same direction, not just Wal-Mart. They need to protect themselves from potential lawsuits. They don't really have the professional photographers' interest in mind. It's all a business decision.
The reality is that intentional theft of pro pictures is NOT going to be caught by an average underpaid clerk in a Walmart photolab. Even the incompetent, ignorant theft of pro photos will only be stopped by those with good photographic and computer knowledge who are likely in more professional photo labs and less likely to encounter such situations.
The big deal is: How would you like to pay out $200,000 to defend a frivolous charge of child porn. brought about by Walmart calling the police over a shot of your child in the bathtub?
If you have the kind of money to waste and don't care about your rights, than you are certainly one of a kind.
As far as copyright is concerned, why should an enthusiast who is in the right place at the right time and wants to get some enlargements made have to try and somehow prove that he/she took the pictures?
As I said before, any knowledgable photographer can spot real potential copyright violations. Harassing everyone is unnecessary and unacceptable.
You can blame that completely on the lawyers and the judges. Just like the hot cup of coffee at McDonalds, or the Toyota 4Runner that rolled over because the stupid woman panicked when she drove off the shoulder and cranked the wheel completely to it's stop. The lawyers for following through on stupid lawsuits like this because of the payout to them, and the judges for not throwing out these frivolous lawsuits out the door immediately.
Not really! You can blame that on the ultra-conservative, Christian right approaches of some business owners of large store chains.
Sorry to say, such is the state of affairs these days. You need to keep up with the news and the times. If you are going to take pictures of your child in such a state, you have better print out the photo's at home. I did such shots with my kids, but I would never be stupid enough to send it out to a lab for developing. Sign of the times. It's not just Wal-Mart, other labs will report you as well.
Actually from what I understand it IS just Walmart in some areas. In more conservative areas, it may be others as well but generally still the similar type of box store.
When I do a studio shoot, I sell a CD of low res images for a small fee. I've lost count of how many times my customers have come back to me and told me that Wal Mart wouldn't let them print the pictures. I PRAISE WALMART for this. Those cheap customers are suppose to order regular prints from me, and they're trying to cheat me out of profits. EVERY print house is suppose to do this, but WalMart and sometimes Walgreens are the only ones that seem to.
Like others have suggested in this thread, why not get your prints done from more of a professional lab. I get mine from EZPrints (through smugmug), which is outstanding quality, and cheaper than going to WalMart, since you do it online.
I agree. It's a good thing that they are paying attention (even if it's just to cover their own butts!) but there's no proof to be had by the lab employees seeing a card or even the pictures on the card.
Yup, those cheap SOB customers.... I have seen prices posted here for say, an 8x10 print, range anywhere from $20-40. Also, have seen posted here of "sitting fees" of $150-300. You can get prints at Walmart for $1.98. Is it any wonder why the customers would want to go to Walmart over coming to the photographer for prints? 10 prints at Walmart for less than $20, but at $20 a pop, it's $200-400 from a photographer? Ridiculous.
I'm not speaking about you specifically, but these are the figures I have seen floating around this forum. I'm not a professional photographer. I'm just a normal poor US consumer with a camera. I think it is absolutely ridiculous what photographers charge for portraits and think it is absolutely ridiculous that someone does not have the right to print the pictures where ever they choose. The photographer is paid for taking the picture, that is the service. It's the ridiculous laws that allow photographers to rip off the customers like this.
mrodgers, do you believe that it's ok to xerox and distribute pages from a book? The fact that you pay for an item (be it a book, photo, song) does not give you the right to duplicate it.
I see the why teachers might want to xerox chapters from a novel, or a page from a math book for a class, but that doesn't change copyright laws. I think books are pricey, but that doesn't mean the $40 I use to buy a book gives me the right to copy it and do with it what I will. There is a lot of background cost in producing books (paying salaries, equipment, marketing, etc). It might only cost a few dollars to *actually* produce the item: book.
A print might only cost a few dollars to print--but photographers have to keep their business running. It's about respect for a trade.
I'm not a professional photographer either (I have been paid for my services once or twice, but it hasn't even begun to take dent out of how much I spent in travel, or equipment) but I do have respect for people doing honest work.
Separate names with a comma.