If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Oh don't worry, I wont destroy my images with something that does nothing.
If you have earnt $500 through a photo then seen someone just take it for free yu may think differently. They arent trying to add anything to the shot, just making them harder to steal.
Sam Rudge
A 5D3, some Canon lenses, the Sigma L and a flash
As mentioned earlier, whatever we do, we will make friends and enemies, even if we do nothing at all. As site owner, Chris Kilroy has the difficult taks to find a way which at least doesn't compromise the "commercial aspect" of the site so to say or at best would even help make JP.net attract a larger customer base.
We here - me included - are just discussing details in all this question. I understand both parts, but am sure, there's no system pleasing all.
I agree with Gerardo, no matter which way it swings not everyone will be happy.
But you're forgetting the reason you upload them.
It's so you can share them with other people and they can enjoy viewing them. Watermarking a photo would defeat this purpose, if you are worried about theft then just don't upload it at all.
... or upload it slightly altered just to be able to share them but at the same time feeling sure enough, that it won't be ripped off.
I still prefer to see a great photo with a small watermark, than not to see it at all. And I guess, that's the main mechanism in this whole watermark thing.
I'm not going to discuss ATI affairs with you, end of discussion.
Tell me why its such an issue for you when its an optional scheme?
Don't want to use it, then don't bother, don't want to view a watermarked image then don't open it. Simple really.
I hate to start an argument with you Garry because I like your photos BUT:
Kcmh posting the image shouldn't be a problem because of the fact that he has left the tag at the bottom on so we know who owns it.
Personally, a watermark that is in the sky of a photo and not directly over the plane isn't really a problem for me as long as its light. HOWEVER, in shots like the one kcmh posted, I would hate to see a watermark because of the fact there's something in the whole part of the photo, not just a plane in the middle. It would be very distracting in my opinion.
Firstly you don't have permission to post that image here, so you'll kindly remove it ASAP.
Find someone else to try to intimidate. I will not remove it. Like Steve said I did not claim its mine, and it has "ATI" brand bar on it. So its noted who owns the photo.
Secondly tell me how it is any of your business?
You wanted opinions right?
I'm not going to discuss ATI affairs with you, end of discussion.
Fair enough but you wanted to change this site so again I am giving my opinion.
Tell me why its such an issue for you when its an optional scheme?
Don't want to use it, then don't bother, don't want to view a watermarked image then don't open it. Simple really.
To be honest I have upload one count them one photo this year.
To be honest it makes the photo look like shit if there is some image saying its jp.net or a.net or whatever.
Specifically: "All other reproduction is prohibited except in accordance with a Usage Agreement as described below"
You have clearly taken the image from the ATI website and are using it without permission. I strongly suggest you remove the image.
Using your rationale it would be OK for say CNN to use anyones image from here or a.net by simply including the copyright bar, and that would be OK would it?
You clearly know nothing about copyright.
I don't recall asking for opinions on ATI business practice or policy, if you could point me to where you found that, please let me know.
I am hardly asking to change the site, all I asked for was for those that want to, they be allowed to watermark their images. Why is it so difficult for you to grasp that choice is a good thing?
If you don't want to view any images that are watermarked, be my guest. The other alternative is that they never get seen at all. Most rational thinking people would suggest that viewing a watermarked picture that may be of interest is better than not seeing it at all.
Steve, I respectfully disagree, he does not have permission from the photographer to re-post the photo here, and is in violation of ATI terms and conditions, simply including the copyright bar is irrelevant.
Garry Lewis
Air Team Images - www.airteamimages.com
Air Traffic Controller - Toronto ACC (West Low)
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
, I was let out of work early so I split because the site was loading to slow at work. It's fixed now 
Comment