Thieving Scumbag Facebook shoplifters- Rant follows

Got to agree with you Figbat. I often come across my photos on adverts on Horsequest or similar, and people haven't even bothered to ask me if it is OK to use it. The thing is I do it for a hobby and wouldn't charge them anyway, but it would be nice if they would ask my permission first! As you say, a lot of people just do not seem to understand about copyright.

It is just a niggle for me, but I can understand how it can be a huge nightmare for pros.
 
I feel your pain.

What would you do about this?

Picture3-7.png


I, too, am a professional photographer who has recently gone into horse event photography. I am feeling rather disillusioned now.

The thing is she is so pleased with herself and so blatant!

All suggestions gratefully received.
 
what would i do? click the 'report this photo' button. She admits its stolen so no work needed on your part!

I actually came across a photographers site not long ago which had the ideal gallery software to stop stealing. on page you see small preview covered with watermark you can then hover over image and you get part of it in detail without watermark. move your mouse around to see all bit by bit but never more than about 1/20th of the image at once. can't remember which tog it was though.
 
Trouble is can you invoice people?

Should I chase the people who pinched this pic (I don't sell pics, just the gear)

Stolen photoshopped image - emailed about it and they just photoshopped it more! :mad:
rolled_gag.gif


My original
flyveilblue2.jpg
 
Perhaps invoice her, give her a deadline to pay (say, 7 days) and if no payment received, then report the photo?
 
ok found site with software its www.xcphotos.co.uk BUT if you hover over the image it gives you the URL of the full photo which you can inturn view which has no copyright stamp so defeating their attempt at stopping people. So that software but with ability to hide URL would work well I would have thought as the URL itself of the image was not going to be guessed!
 
It is difficult to invoice anyone unless you have contact details for them! I would report it to the administrators of the relevant website.
 
Last night I was pointed in the direction of the Facebook account of a your rider who we photograph fairly regularly. Mum only very occasionally buys a picture, maybe twice a year?

But the rider has over 100 shoplifted images in her "Ponies" photo album on FB?

Advertising for me or blatant theft?

Do I:

A: Report it for Facebook and get them removed

B: Invoice the parents for the full amount of £312 for the 104 images at £3 each

c: Be nice and offer a volume discount for prompt settlement as they are such discerning customers

Your answers please audience.
 
I have emailed her an invoice for £3. If she pays, it stays. If she doesn't but removes it, I will still invoice her again with a copy to her father plus the evidence. If she doesn't but it stays, I will inform FB.

The ruddy cheek tbh.
 
santa145 said:
ok found site with software its www.xcphotos.co.uk BUT if you hover over the image it gives you the URL of the full photo which you can inturn view which has no copyright stamp so defeating their attempt at stopping people. So that software but with ability to hide URL would work well I would have thought as the URL itself of the image was not going to be guessed!
Click to expand...


No need for the URL - you could just print screen on that website with no issue at all especially as there's no watermark...
 
I could understand how frustrating it is, but the only way to really stop it happening is by having very poor quality proofs (or ones covered well by a watermark), and if people are interested in seeing better proofs with the intention of buying then they e-mail you with a request.

I know a well known Irish photographer had to do as above, as it was getting out of hand.

Pretty much everyone knows how to use 'print screen', so blocking any right click action is useless.
 
Only a general observation, but sadly i think it is time for many photographers to fully understand how much the industry has changed, and quite simply, digital imaging and photography no longer requires the skilled ability to photograph that they used to.

Anyone who has the equipment can stand in front of a fence and take good photographs and what is more, there are plenty of photographers around, and therefore the value of the product is lessened.
I'm sure there are many very skilled photographers out there, i know several, but the whole market is not as wide ranging as it used to be...it is saturated
 
My local pro-tog used to have a fantastic website with decent quality and sized thumbnails to view his work. They're now heavily watermarked and pixelated :(
 
There is another side to all this too,since photographers are effectively placing images taken of people,without their prior consent on the internet for the entire world to see,and for third parties also to copy. Once you put somthing on the internet you have no control over it. My advice to all you professional photographers ,is that the problem of unauthorised use of images,while annoying ,may be viewed by some as a far lesser offence than your putting the photographs on the internet in the first place.
 
you could screenprint but the image you are screen printing is small and could be made smaller again and could have a copyright plastered across it!

Hmmm if only I knew more than HTML coding I could make a fortune with a revoluntionary new gallery display software ;) :p
 
bogpony said:
Only a general observation, but sadly i think it is time for many photographers to fully understand how much the industry has changed, and quite simply, digital imaging and photography no longer requires the skilled ability to photograph that they used to.

Anyone who has the equipment can stand in front of a fence and take good photographs and what is more, there are plenty of photographers around, and therefore the value of the product is lessened.
I'm sure there are many very skilled photographers out there, i know several, but the whole market is not as wide ranging as it used to be...it is saturated
Click to expand...


So what you're saying is that anyone with a good horse can win a CCI 4*??? Or Gordon Ramsay's only a good chef because he has the best pans?? Time I changed jobs :D

I actually agree with the fact that the old guard photographers DO need to change their thinking and attitude but the equipment has little to do with it. :)

The other thing is you don't get the amateurs covering this :)

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=197865
 
Last edited:
George Michie said:
So what you're saying is that anyone with a good horse can win a CCI 4*??? Or Gordon Ramsay's only a good chef because he has the best pans?? Time I changed jobs :D

I actually agree with the fact that the old guard photographers DO need to change their thinking and attitude but the equipment has little to do with it. :)
Click to expand...

No of course not George, but sadly the advance in technology can over compensate dramatically for a lack of skill...I know a company who send trainees with little photography knowledge out onto XC courses, sit them at a jump on a rapid sequence setting (forgive me for not knowing the technical term) and the likelihood is that one of those 10 photographs that are shot within a three second time span will be saleable.

Where is the skill in that??

They are your competition, and they are ten a penny....and whilst you can probably find fault with their photographs to the vast majority of your market, they look just fine to many of the people that put their hand in their pockets and buy them.

On the flip side, there are photographers moaning that noone is buying their photos....but their photos are just not very good...
 
The one's you're speaking about there are competition but they're proper firms. They're taking the chance (which is increased through technology) on the tog getting the shots but if the model works for them more strength to the shutter finger :) It still doesn't make it right that if they have the images online, watermarked, that they get lifted without paying.

The guy/girl coming out to an event and sending on a few images to riders because they know them or get asked for them really isn't an issue, for me anyway. Personally, I've helped a few people asking for hints or tips on how to get the best out of their equipment and been pleased to do so :) You never know, that person might be the next big photographer anyway and everyone has to make a start somewhere. Might as well help them as they might have a job going in the future :p

It's more than just photographer performance here, and technology changes, it's also customer expectation and attitude. If riders went into the tack shop and lifted a bridle without paying for it (which they'd never dream of doing :) ) they'd be prosecuted. For some reason because it's a digital file it's alright to take it without paying.

By the way, I've just entered Burghley ;)
 
spidge said:
No that doesn't offend me as ultimately all that does is link to the photographers gallery. It's the shoplifters who nick all the images then you get all their mates saying lovely pictures etc etc. Meantime I have stood in a field for 12 hours to provide them with fresh chatter fodder with nought to show for it except some Facebook advertising. That offends me and is now against my rules.

Digital is immediate, I prefer to look at images online but I prefer to read a physical book rather than an online or electronic version. It's all about preference. See Nikki if you order your pix from me had I been the tog you could have had the jpeg immediately plus the print shortly thereafter when ordered online.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh sounds good!!! Wonder if the others do that as there are limited people who do that up here I think so you see the same companies time and time again.:)

I also, when I did posted the pix, credited the photgraphers and the watermark was still on.

nikki xxx
 
From a competitors point of view, yes it is nice to have the odd professional photo but at the same time if there isnt a photographer at the event then that doesnt bother me too much. I think photographers have to remember many competitors don't ask for you to be at the event and many wouldnt even notice if you were there or not. Therefore it could be argued you are taking pictures of them and putting them on the internet without their permission. As people are out every weekend competing they often do not want to buy one every week for it would get very expensive, especially with photos starting from £7.
Photographers need to move with the times and offer jpeg images at a low cost (under £5) which the inidivdual can then do whatever they would like, so allowing it to be used on facebook. Facebook is great for sharing photos so photographers need to find an affordable way to allow indivduals to do this.
I also do not think they should charge someone to view photo on their website, they do need to be low quality with a large watermark.
 
lizzie_liz said:
Therefore it could be argued you are taking pictures of them and putting them on the internet without their permission.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'm not being bolshy here, but if there's nothing in the conditions of entry to the event there's absolutely nothing to stop the photographer from posting the images wherever they want.

If the photographer is "official" you'd probably expect him/her to publish your images so you can choose whether or not to buy them?

Regarding the affordable bit, I've seen a facebook page where the individual had about 20 images from one event complete with watermarks. Given that facebook size files were available for a couple of quid each just exactly what does affordable mean??
 
Mike007 said:
There is another side to all this too,since photographers are effectively placing images taken of people,without their prior consent on the internet for the entire world to see,and for third parties also to copy. Once you put somthing on the internet you have no control over it. My advice to all you professional photographers ,is that the problem of unauthorised use of images,while annoying ,may be viewed by some as a far lesser offence than your putting the photographs on the internet in the first place.
Click to expand...

No offence is being committed by posting pictures of people. Believe it or not, I don't need your permission to take your picture in a public place and to publish it at will. Do you think the paparazzi and tabloids ask permission of their victims? Whilst equestrian events are generally held on private land, the fact that they are open to public access defines them as a public place with respect to privacy laws.

Copyright theft, on the other hand, IS illegal. It's no different from pirated software or unauthorised DVD copying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top