Thanks for the link to your site I found it very helpful :-)
I did read the copy right page you sent me to and I now have a better understanding of the laws. A lot of people are so confused about the real laws of copywriting, I will be sending some friends there to check it out for themselves.
Thanks for the input :-)
Why bother to use PHP to watermark an image?
I use Photoshop (or GIMP if I'm on my Linux)
PHP is used so the images can be modified on the server.
Originally Posted by CreativeCozza
I have photo shop but haven't found many tutorials that I can understand, so I am still looking for some beginer one's .
Last edited by southgirl; 02-06-2007 at 08:41 PM.
Even watermarks can be violated
Watermarks can be deleted or removed, digimarks as well. As someone posted before, whatever image that is accesible by internet or whatever other kind of media resource (e-brochure, e-presentations, demos, etc ) can be stolen. Even doesnt matter if the picture or image is embedded in flash, executable or whatever, there is always the possibility to "extract" them.
Please start a new thread as your post is off topic. Thanks.
Originally Posted by southgirl
make your image "less juicy"
I'm a photographer and generally concerned about such things. Generally, for the immediate practical purpose of life, copyright is useless except in the attempt to prove you own an original work. "You can't legislate morality." (Who said that?) Getting a copyright to encompass the world is impractical since laws vary from country to country. You might as well be a dog and chase your tail. Keep your highest quality stuff to yourself unless you are selling it through a secure site and expect to make $$. There is always something somebody can do to rip your image and client-side programming is the same way. The key is to make your image as spare as possible while still making it looking presentable. Why give somebody super quality when that image by nature on the net is subject to theft. Getting familiar with your photo software is the key to working this out and still keeping your work looking fine.
As far as bandwidth theft, try changing the name of your images or the page location and shouldn't that kill the problem? If they don't know where it is, how can they use the image? Just some thoughts.
Spare - an option
Freshair is right, one good option is make the image as spare as possible, additionally use all kind of resources since the more simple scripts (disabling right click for example) till the most complicated. Some software might help as well. An interesting software is CopySafe, I am web programmer and I found quite challenging to "extract" or detect where the image is hosted with this application protection.
One inconvinient is that the visitor is "forced" to download the CopySafe plugin in order to browse the web page and view the images. The images are encrypted hosted in the server, the application decrypts them to present them trough an applet. The applet is secured because in the parameters is not possible to see any information that could help to "guess" where is the encrypted image hosted, any access route is visible in the Java console.
But ... in any case, protection are just protection, some are easy to break, others not, but always are a good challenging "invitation" to breaking them. The best way to protect your images is not publishing them, spare them and do not put high quality images on the net
06-25-2007, 02:05 AM
You cannot stop someone from stealing artwork, atleast short of brain manipulation. All copyrights/watermarks can do is try and deter people from doing so, and if they still continue, then provide as much evidence as possible to punish them for stealing. I've never seen a method of actually disabling someone from stealing an image. Only methods that make it harder to do so.
Even large watermarks plastered over work (which i feel is somewhat ridiculous anyway as it takes away the whole point of the art - to see it!) can be outdone fairly easy these days with someone moderatley knowledged in Photoshop (i.e. the clone stamp tool!)
I'm not sure what my point is, but unless someone comes up with some sort of uber-coding that can somehow self destruct an image when it is copied/downloaded w/out permission; then i guess we'll just have to live with our modest detterents. Anyway - 2 my knowledge i've never seen anyone steal art that's been worth fussing over, and got away with it, so it's not all bad!
06-25-2007, 03:01 AM
The thing is that if you place the images in a web page then you are giving people permission to download them since web page content MUST be downloaded before the page can be displayed. To stop just anyone downloading/viewing it you can set up a password protected area and require people to login before they can see it. That way you know who has access to download what. No need to destruct the image if the person isn't allowed to download it because they can't access it if they can't login and they can't login unless you give permission to download/view.
Originally Posted by RTP
06-25-2007, 10:58 AM
I listened to some (UK) legal advice on this subject recently which says whilst images are available to download that does not constitute removal of copyright. They still belong to the creator and cannot be used without permission to do so or within any conditions provided from the same source as the image. You can use the image for use if its within the licence. It was also stated that its the responsibility of a person selling images to make sure any images that do not belong to them are within the licence. It's covered by secondary infringement of copyright. To take an example of how dangerous this could be if you were to create a logo which included an image which you didn't have the right to use and subsequently that logo was used in a number of print mediums and livery you could easily be liable for the reprint and production of all that material.
I deal with stock libraries for images, they have teams looking out for violations and some images may not be available because a client has paid for sole use. Also, and I'll use Roy Lichenstein as an example, some images are rarely given permission to use.
06-27-2007, 08:50 PM
Splitter, Html, Images
Many years ago I downloaded a free image splitter. I was putting up a web page that had a lot of pics that were a little "xrated". Anyway I was very new to the web but knew that I did not want these pics copied. So anyway to make a long story short. I split these pics so small that it would have taken a doctor to put them back together. The beauty part was that this image splitter spit out the total code for the image in html. Now I have just downloaded a image splitter and have not tried it out. But it would seem to me that the average person would not want to copy dozens and dozens of mini pics to make one that they could use.
So my point it that if one wants to post a pic, even tho it is copied on the computer, this splitter would discourage folks from copying it. I put up stock photos on the net and I know that the small photos can not be enlarged without damage to the image. So the smaller the pic the harder it is for a person to download and use the pic, unless ofcourse you have a very small pic, then who the heck cares anyway, really. But if you have a quality pic that you want to sell on the net then you have to save it in a high resolution so that it can print out. If you same it small and at a small resolution you will not get a pic worth copying.
Anyway I really did want to find something on this site that might reproduce the effect on my images that little splitter did. So my question is directed at the moderator. Is there a code that would allow my images to be split say if it did it myself in Adobe or what have you, and allow them to be inserted in a web page, using html, that would not let space between the pics? It has been a long time since I put up pages and at first try I was not able to get the pic. to reassemble without space.
Last edited by ProfessionalBA; 06-27-2007 at 08:57 PM.
Reason: HTML use
06-27-2007, 09:53 PM
Image splitters are defeated by the "Print Screen" button.
06-28-2007, 09:10 PM
Maybe true, but what I said still holds true too and...
If one puts up an image that is a thumbnail to enlarge that would destroy it is the image was saved in a small number resolution. This is true for most pics on the net. Blowing them up destroys the look.
A pic that some one has printed using print screen, then has to be scanned back into the computer, and adjusted to the size the person wants. Seems like a lot of trouble to me for a jpg.
Bottom line is like you folks said if someone wants the pic. bad enough they will take it. I still like my split image idea, at least they have to go thru some work to get it, print screen or not.
So do you know how to program the code for this kind of image, one that has been split and grouped on a web page without the space?
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)