New watermark test.

The PDB is what first attracted me to Dave's Garden, and the photos of the plants were an important part of the database's appeal. I've downloaded photos to use for comparison myself. At first, it didn't occur to me that this might be considered theft. After visiting the forums, I realize that some of these images aren't just somebody's home photos, but works of art.

My photographs certainly don't fit into that category, and I would prefer that viewers have a clear image rather than trying to see through a watermark. It will sadden me to see some of those lovely photos marred by a watermark, but I respect someone's need to do so. I think having a choice is the best answer. That includes, watermark, no watermark, copyright mark, or just removing one's photos.

To clarify: It's not considered theft to download and store photos on your hard drive. Theft comes into play when you then use those photos in your own publications (electronic or otherwise, commercial or not) without permission. Even if the photographer is credited, permission should first be sought.

This person clarifies the issues very well at her site: http://www.pointoffocus.com/Graphics/focusrant.html and http://www.pointoffocus.com/Graphics/focusintro.html She also links to the website of an attorney who specializes in intellectual property laws and has dealt with internet copyright issues for 25 years: http://www.ivanhoffman.com/index.html

This message was edited Sunday, Jul 14th 3:48 AM

Dimitri

I love the idea of Dave's Garden Bees! :)

Dave here is a link that just might be of use to help solve the problem. http://www.btinternet.com/~scenicphotos/bridgesnight.htm
But use the person's name who the copywright belongs to. Because it's so light it won't distort the image and I don't think that anyone could remove it,just a suggestion.

dave, I like your solution best where each picture poster simply chooses how much if any protection he wants. Personally, I'd prefer not to have my photo defaced with anything at all, not even the copyright in the lower righthand corner. As I am not in the business of selling these images elsewhere, feel free to use them! But I do like to see them posted as the image was intended, not marred in any way. My idea is to share some of the joy of my garden, especially plants given or traded to me from davesgarden friends.

I am just amazed that anyone is concerned that someone is using a copy of a flower picture..I don't care if my pics are used or not, even if it's for a publication...But since the problem is here, I vote for each one being allowed to chose which level of protection they want on their own photos........

I know of at least 2 professional photographers on this site, and at least one has had her photos posted on a retail site with someone elses copyright on it.

Baa,

this thread only proves that there are people with variable knowledge on PC use, on copyright issues, on DG pic use and on attitude to the problem.

Dave has really been very patient, knowledgable and efficient both in handling the "thief" and in offering many ideas to the members.

I think it was his talk with ebay that persuaded the fellow to take down Poppysue's pic.

On the other hand, a swarm of DG bees will show any "thief" at least that there is a public focusing on him eating the stolen pie - I am serious, but expressing in humour (soft upper lip I call it - known as "sarcasm").

Dimitri

Same thing with stealing music. But. everyone is doing that too. burning cd's

hi all

I'm glad this topic is started although I'm a bit late adding my opinion

theft is the main reason I dont add to the database anymore and why I have the no right click program on my web site. I'm hoping the average surfer doesnt know how to by pass the no right click program.

the site will be launched againn in a few months with the images marked with my name and if I can find it a see through but visable copyright logo.

I'm planning a book and dont want to find my images else where on the 'net.

It's good to know that one person has contacted me after seeing an image on DG to see if I will let them use the image on a leaflet or poste. this guy is the honest one but how many other surfers have lifted images? before I did the no right click to my revamped marksgardenplants someone told me they had lifted ALL!! the images from the older site.

anyway I'm all for Dave adding any kind of watermark to help prevent theft from this site.

Mark

Good talking points here - thanks for the cogent discussions.

I am going to add several different kinds of watermarks, and then people can pick among them what they want used for their pictures. One of the options will be to have no watermark at all.

Some will be extremely unobtrusive - some will be like the picture above. But the choice will be yours.

And, regarding translucency: If anybody want translucent watermarks on your image - add them yourself with your image software package before you upload them to DG.

Again, thanks for the good conversation - I enjoyed it.

dave

One last thing: I removed the right-click warning on the site here. It was basically for a demonstration to those in this thread. Now that the demonstration is over, I got rid of it.

dave

Here's a suggestion and it's just a rough idea. When you click on a photo and the full sized image comes up,there is a line that says'this image is copyrighted by 'melody'. What about adding to this a little more explaination. Maybe after this, state something to the effect that the law requires permission from the photographer for use of the photo.If you are interested in using this photo,please click on the person's name to contact them.Otherwise,it is a crime to take these photos without permission.

I know that this will only stop the honest or semi honest people.And the watermark choices could be used too.Maybe stating that non watermarked photos are possibly available from the photographer,but DG has no ownership of the photos and the photographer should be contacted.

The PDB is increasingly becoming high on the list of searches of commercial companies,most of whom are honest,and they are finding images here that they are willing to pay for.Several members have had photos used and have been compensated for it.It would be a shame to make this impossible. If an honest company has a good experience with the PDB,they will return.

Dave,we joked once not long ago about juggernauts and not very many people can honestly say that they have created one.There is absolutely no way to anticipate everything about this juggernaut and we're all learning as we go.Crooked people are everywhere and we're going to encounter them and have to pay the price for their dishonesty.I'm sure you'll find a way for us to continue growing and still protect us.

I like Dimitri's idea. And it can be useful...but we can't catch everybody.Hopefully we'll find a solution that we can all accept.

dave,
I'm of the opinion that anyone can have one of my pictures if they like it enough. My adage is that if you feed other people, you never grow hungry. I've found this a very all-inclusive on-line community and hate the idea that commerce dictates that we don't have a picture to view to get an idea of a plants foliage and bloom. I guess I should start putting "Free to download and enjoy". Thanks for everything!

I'm sitting in the middle of the see-saw on this one!!

If pictures are taken from the site without permission, and are used for commercial purposes, then a hammer should come down on the person infringing these copyright warnings.

On the other hand, I am not a professional photographer, nor do I have my own web-site, nor (as Mark) plan to use my photographs for my own commercial use, so it doesn't really matter to me so much that it would it make me remove photographs from any site, or database. My photos are just 'snapshots' of my plants or any other image which I think important enough to show the DG community, so they are in no way professional, and I wouldn't want them to be treated as such. Although, if I should open up some other gardening site, and find my photo with someone else's name under it, then I could get quite peeved (but not murderous), if I wasn't at least mentioned.

I am, therefore, in total agreement with those DG professional photographers, who actually earn their bread-and-butter through their photography profession, and who don't want their photos stolen by anybody.

The idea of a watermark is good, but I can't imagine it being so concealed, that it would 'just be there'. I am tending more to the suggestion put forward by Howie, where each and every one of us should be responsible for marking our photos, and not burdening Dave with this.

Each person can have her/his own style of watermark, copyright note or whatever they think is required to protect that image, hence continuing to fill the PDB with the wonderful photos we see every day, and Dave doesn't get a headache over it.

I doff my cap again to Dave for making this an issue to be dealt with, but I wouldn't want him to be burdened down with a legal situation which, in my opinion, is really not under his jurisdiction. Maybe I'm wrong.

All the best

Wintermoor

I don't know where I am on this issue, but I don't consider my photography anything valuable. LOL I do know one of my photos is on two websites, but both are for educational purposes and both asked me. I might be offended if they were using them to make money and did not ask, but obviously that was not the case.

I'm glad you came to that decision, Dave. I'm one that lkes the copyright info at the bottom, but wouldn't like the red "watermark" all across the front. BUT I sure understand others' feelings as well. Now, that decision is put in our hands and I think that's the best way to satisfy the most people.

Hunter, welcome! Glad you're here! If you haven't already figured it out, this place is full of bells, whistles and wonderful caring people. You're gonna' love it here!

Oh, yeah ~ forgot to mention this: If you REALLY don't want others to use your pics, do what I do and take really ugly pictures! LOLOL! *Just kidding*

Hunter what if your photo appears in a book that is a worldwide hit and you dont get mentioned or get a payment?

You could what if anything and everything on the web. you have to use the brain you were given. you know certain things going in to the web. People take music that does not belong to them and they take graphis, pictures, . if you don;t weant people to take it. I guess you don;t put it on. There are ways to encrypt pictures. have seen them done. Theyre are many sites out there with encrypted pictures on them.. Just surf around ., youwill find it. you can learn more from the average 13 year old about how to get things off the web than you willl ever care to know. sit down with one some day and find out what they know next to what you know about computers. its frightning. the average person at our site at Dg. my opinion. is there for fun. and learning. Not to steal a picture of a flower. If they want a photograph of a rose that bad that I have. they are gonna take it no matter.what. Far as I can tell. I am just a basic , self taught surfer like millions of others out there. and if you look back at this discussion. all of us that didn;t know how to do something before. sure did get an education now.! I for one don;t know what right click is. I just have a basic pro mouse.

On a Mac, a right click is achieved by simply holding the button down until the menu appears.

Oh thanks dave! See, now. I guess I have learned something here today.

I think that is the only time that I would be upset-- if someone used my pictures in a book and the book made a great deal of money. I wouldn't necessarily want monetary compensation, but I WOULD like at least a mention as a contributing photographer. Otherwise folks can help themselves to any picture that I upload to the Plant Database. Everyone obviously has their own opinions and feels differently about this subject.

I have done a great deal of local, first hand genealogical research and by the process of sharing and osmosis, my research and my name is all over the internet in the databases of people that I have never corresponded with and who claim this research as their own. I used to get a little torqued about it, but what can I do? It's just one of those things you have to get over.

that's just my opinion-- other mileage may vary. :-)

Inda, you are then FAR above what the average "JOE" is on the internet. then you should be published in hard form , not on the screen. you are doing all this work for nothing. You need to do a book.

I just was looking at my computer here. I went to the plant data base. and then. guess what. you can hit printthis page. hello. I can print things off this site with my printer. How are you gonna stop people from printing things off? ? Or am I on a different page here>

yes, it's different mimi. For the average joe, it's nothing for their pictures, in fact some people like to have their work appreciated. But it's not fair for people to copy, put on a retail site (or ebay) and make money using something that isn't theirs. As for putting them in a book, it doesn't mean someone is not a serious photographer or writer or anything else just because it's not in a book. More people are on the web these days than in the library or bookstore. I'd hate to see these people not able to share their wonderful work with us because people are stealing it.

Mingsmimi,

I've already written several genealogy books. ;-) Five to be exact. I'm working on a sixth if I can ever find the time to sit at the computer and work on it.

I guess it just comes down to priorities or what is mostimportant to you.

I am just Josephine Gardener taking pictures with a cheap digital camera and putting them online for people to enjoy and reference. I'm not a very good photographer (It helps, I guess, if you are smarter than the camera LOL), and I don't mind if people use my pictures for their auctions or whatever. I DO think I would frown deeply if someone published my pictures in a book without attaching my name to them.

My genealogical endeavors are more important to me, I guess, than my rinky dink amateur photography. I'm sure that's not the case for everyone.

Inda...oh wow! Where are you listed.!! I would love to read your things. See, it is a small world. You get to meet so many interesting and different people on lilne! EW! Elk county.!I am Mercer! Ew! WOW! I would love to see your gardens!
tiG. some people just have no manners!

WOW! This thread hatched and really grew over the weekend!!

2 small points: The DG member who asked for photos to be removed did so because she (he?) wasn't alsolutely certain all her posted photos were only her own photos, and plans to replace them with some she knows are hers. (She posted this in another thread.) It wasn't fear of someone using her photos without permission, but rather a possible copyright infringement, now that poppysue has brought what all that means to our attention. Also, when I posted my suggestion of a watermark on a different and earlier thread, I had in mind an image like the hyperlink windsurfer posted above in this thread. I really like that kind of a mark, and it doesn't intefere so much with viewing the image fully.

Dave, good job in trying to find a better way to protect our images posted to DG!! As for my own photos, it is unlikely I'd ever take one good enough to be published (unlike some of the stunning photos I have seen posted here), but if I did, I'd want it protected.

I volunteer to be a DG Bee... LOL.

I don't want to hi-jack this thread from it's original purpose, so I'll be brief.

All of my books were self published so they aren't listed on Amazon or anything.

Two of my books are family trees on my maiden name. One of them is in the LDS library in Salt Lake City, Utah.

One book is the Session Records of the Elkton Presbyterian Church of Dagus Mines, Fox Twp., Elk Co., PA beginning in 1854. My grandmother's neighbor had the original book and let me copy it so I transcribed and indexed it. This book is in the LDS library in Salt Lake City.

I inventoried all of the cemeteries in three townships of Clearfield County and turned it into a book, indexed it, etc. This was my biggest seller. I think this one is in the LDS library in Salt Lake City but I can't remember. BTW, all of the cemeteries that I have done are online at the Clearfield County PAGENWEB page. I have a soft spot for long distance researchers. :-)

I did a limited print on a book that was a transcription of the entire 1850 census of Elk County, PA that was originally part of a project designed to start getting this type of info online for folks out of the area. When I was finished, I basically had a book so I indexed it and sold it locally.

I am currently working on a book about the early schoolhouses that were located in Fox Township, Elk Co., PA-- that is, if I ever get a chance to sit down at the computer. I have it started, but I guess these types of things are winter projects.

Boy, if you didn't know who I was before, it sure wouldn't take a genius to figure it out now. :-)

my sister in law worked in a cemetary in England for the summer a few years back. Giving tours. you can imagine what their headstones adn all look like. She says it is Quite lovely.

I love the new semi-transparent watermark, Dave. Looks great and is a great happy medium. :)

Mings and Inda - I have a whole series of photographs I took at local cemetaries. I love going to cemeteries, reading the old stones, imagining what the peoples' lives were like...And I love the artistry of the stones themselves. I'll be adding a gallery to my webpage soon. :)

wow! Sounds great!

I think it is very responsible of Dave to want to protect everyones right to not have a picture "stolen" unless the person asks to use the image. One of the things I enjoy the most about this website is the giving I have observed from member to member. The people from davesgarden.com are very giving and generous people. They give freely of information, seeds, plants and love. The giving should be voluntary. Giving voluntarily as opposed to someone taking without asking. It must especially seem tainted when someone has a stolen picture which is used for a total strangers profit. I think any kind of watermark over the picture is going to take away from the beauty of the photograph. I agree that everyone should have a choice about a watermark.

Well said, Fairyhunter. Welcome to DG, by the way. :)

I missed the enitre thing. Who;s picture was stolen for hom much $$$????And as for Dave. he is just too smart and devoted beyond words. Just coming up with this site is unreal. Let alone everything else. hay .with all this worry about a photo. what about the entire site idea.?Someone can duplicate that too. the format and everything. correct?I mean. All the homework has been done already. Its just there for the taking. Can;t he copywrite the site?

Mimi - see this: http://www.pointoffocus.com/Graphics/focusrant.html and http://www.pointoffocus.com/Graphics/focusintro.html This lady sums up the issue pretty well, I think.

Gardenwife, When I clicked on the link. it changed the size of my font for this page! HONEST! Strange> Anyways. I missed the connection between that and Dg site. Or was that person on a Dg site. I feel like I walked into the"Dallas" when Pam finds out it was all a dream.

Thank you gardenwife. Your kind welcome is exactly what I mean when I say how kind and generous everyone on this website can be.

Mimi - I know this thread is mostly about the watermark and protecting peoples' work from theft, but I thought this lady's observations about intellectual copyright stuff parallel our discussion here. The lady makes some good points about how hard people work on their artwork and how it shouldn't be used without giving proper credit. She links to a lawyer's site on her page, too, and he has detailed stuff about copyright law.