flickr security

thebaz

following my Irish Times incident, I'm tightening up my security on flickr, i have disabled downloading images to just me;
when viewing images all photos state "All rights reserved" , this is default setting , is this how others are setting security on flickr , i don't want people taking stuff without asking me !

Also does anyone know how to set security on myspace , can't seam to disable downloading my pics .

cheers.

Fajitas!

There's no security on myspace whatsoever.

Just upload the pics at the lowest resolution possible really.

Even on flickr, if someone has a bit of common sense as regards URLs, they can get your full res photos, so I advise uploading your lowest res ones to there too.

They're the dangers of showing your photos online.

DaireQuinlan

yeah, for example ...
This picture of yours:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebaz/503574018
All sizes button disabled.
Look through the HTML source and you can find the URL for the 'farm' image which is whatever server flickr is serving the image up from. Then you can append a _b or _o to the end to get the large or original versions...

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/211/503574018_974634330f_b.jpg

Thats the large version. If you're actually concerned about it I'd suggest watermarking or just uploading low-res shots in the first place.

Myspace ? What fajitas said.

daedalus2097

That's the nature of the beast unfortunately... You can use Javascript to protect it from right-clicking and Save File As type operations, but it's very easy to get around. The very fact that it's being displayed on a computer means it can be grabbed in one way or another, so any version of the picture you want people to be able to see can be saved and used elsewhere. Visible watermarking and only using lower res versions are good ideas, or else using an "account holders only" gallery of some sort, but that limits your audience to people you allow in.

gandalf

But is it not bad form to use a picture off Flickr like that. Especially a publication. If I remember baz you forwarded your flickr url to them asking if they were interested in using your photos so you did pre-empt it slightly.

Did you get paid for that picture btw ?

rymus

gandalf wrote:

But is it not bad form to use a picture off Flickr like that.

I think if anything it shows how dishonest and cheap a publication is that they'd use a copyrighted image without even so much as a quick word with the owner. Stupid too, I'd imagine any publication with a decent circulation that would steal images is worryingly naive on copyright law (or has good solicitors). I mean in most cases it's not a matter of if they'll be caught, it's when any by how many people

DaireQuinlan

gandalf wrote:

But is it not bad form to use a picture off Flickr like that. Especially a publication. If I remember baz you forwarded your flickr url to them asking if they were interested in using your photos so you did pre-empt it slightly.

Its not so much 'bad form' as it is 'illegal' :-) As regards daedalus' point though, I would see that flickr thing as an actual security hole. If I mark my flickr stream in such a way as to only allow contacts (for example) see the full size versions then there really isn't any technical reason why that can't be locked down. Its lazy coding on their part. Though really the only way to absolutely avoid the possibility of this happening is to not upload the pictures anywhere in the first place :-)

311

Why don't you just imbed a watermark in your images ,or mark your good photos as private and show them to your contacts ??
Some photos will always be the kind that will get whipped ,so why not make them private ?

Paulw

More and more I'm starting to think about watermarking my images. The only disadvantage is that it ruins it for people just looking at the photo.

Basically, nothing online is safe.

elven

Every single time I see someone showing a watermarked image, people whinge about it. I'm tempted as well but for the watermark to actually be useful, it has to obscure the picture, and so, it will be distracting. It also seems that the sneaky feckers can do a fair bit with a 500px jpg, so unless you seriously limit the resolution, if someone wanted to badly enough, they *could* steal your picture...

Paulw

I think I can relax, mine aren't really worth stealing.

It's a choice - watermark and ruin the image itself, reduce quality to something that just about looks ok online, or just take a chance and see.

Damn pirates.

bigeoino

there are sites out there which are geared to getting behind the flickr protection
(http://www.techroam.com/flickr.php?photoid=503574018)
so you don't even need to view source etc. etc.

and, as a recent flickrite - Rebekka Guðleifsdóttir - found out, it doesn't even matter if you don't post the original - a quote from her blog referenced below.
"....i have never posted high-res versions of my images anywhere on the internet. They were 72dpi, 1200×800 pixels. Apparently, this is enough to be able to blow up to larger sizes ,...."

http://rebekkagudleifs.com/blog/2007/05/15/freedom-of-expression-telling-the-truth/

Flickr don't seem to care. They even deleted her post to Flickr showing the stolen Photo's...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6665723.stm
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:w5Of79VLPfMJ:www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/page3/+http://www.flickr.com/photos/rebba/497746041/&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=uk

So you're on your own and, my advice, if you are going to post to the web (which I aim to try to follow too):-
- watermark your image - at least 'sign' it
- if possible also edit the EXIF info.
- upload in the smallest resolution you can get away with (800 by 600?)

rymus

i wonder if flickr are going to show any interest in patching this gaping security hole? Their attitude to their paying customers has gone seriously downhill since Yahoo got their claws in. Looks like the primary focus of the site has moved from photo sharing to money making.. Or maybe I'm just too cynical?!? Bah, my coffee's gone cold with all the pondering..

Paulw

No where online is safe to post images. Anyone who wants to get an image can. It's that simple. It just takes a little knowledge and a little work.

Yes, sites like FlickR can make it harder, but if someone wants an image, they can still get it.

rymus

actually.. while im on a crusade, do we have any smugmug users here?

311

Why not publicly show your images ,with watermarks in a public collection
Show the unwatermarked images to your contacts privately.

Maybe flickr should offer this service themselves and let their servers do the watermarking and copying at their end.

thebaz

gandalf wrote:

But is it not bad form to use a picture off Flickr like that. Especially a publication. If I remember baz you forwarded your flickr url to them asking if they were interested in using your photos so you did pre-empt it slightly.

Did you get paid for that picture btw ?

I actually got my cheque today ,after speaking to the photo editor , who actually likes my stuff, but as i'm not in the NUJ, makes it more difficult for me to get stuff published ... theres always a catch ...

As posted earlier , i've started using myspace , but its a bit worrying that theres no copyright protection there at all.

City-Exile

thebaz wrote:

... but as i'm not in the NUJ, makes it more difficult for me to get stuff published ...

I had that problem before.
Another reason to despise unions!

rymus

time to join the nuj then

thebaz

rymus wrote:

time to join the nuj then

At least 40% of your income needs to be from photo - journalism , and i'm way off that -- although would love to be a full timer phot journalist

rymus

I thought that too... but it doesnt say anything about it on the page I got via google... just said you have to fill in te application, submit two recent pieces of work and pays your money (and takes your chances presumably)

thebaz

rymus wrote:

I thought that too... but it doesnt say anything about it on the page I got via google... just said you have to fill in te application, submit two recent pieces of work and pays your money (and takes your chances presumably)

i just downloaded the nuj application form , and it states

"If you are a freelance please provide the following information:

Average weekly earnings from journalism? € __________ State % of total income derived from journalism: ________%
Give details of any non-journalistic work: ______________________________________________________________

rymus

bah.. that'll teach me to read stuff instead of letting the ol' eyes glaze over.

run_Forrest_run

this is all very interesting, I have just one flickr user posting my pics are her own! Now these pics are nothing special but I am a bit miffed that she just took em and plonked em onto her own area!

I added comments to the relevant photos so hopefully she will sort it out.

Watermarking is something I have never done before (as I said my photos are not prize winners!) but if it will help stop others being a sneaky snake then I might consider it.

Now, ahem, how do U add a watermark? I presume PS will do it no bother. Must google it.

311

The internet is not the only place that your photos could be used.
I don't have anything worth stealing myself ,but I know there is a lot of stuff out there ,thats probably printed and sold in a shop somewhere.

I can't understand why some of you don't protect your photos a lot more ,at least some privacy on flickr would encourage more interaction with users.