Morven Photo: Words

That is the question ….

When I first moved my images over to Morven Photoblog using PixelPost I was delighted to find out that there was an automatic way of extracting the EXIF data and place it into the webpage. Indeed with the default templates provided with the latest version (1.4 at the time of writing), this is standard.

For some reason, my first reaction was to switch this feature off. Following a number of requests for information about various shots, I switched it back on. Since that time, it has proven useful for people who want to help me with their comments to know what aperture and shutterspeed etc. was used in order to make suggestions for change. Indeed one of my key learning experiences to date around the use of aperture and dof (outined in Learning from Photoblogging? may well not have come so easily to light.

Trawling around the sites which obviously use PxelPost and so have access to this feature, my estimate is that about 50% of people have turned it off. I would be interested to hear your views on this topic. Why you use it or not and which fields are of most interest.

Having been around Flickr and photoblogging since May this year, I have heard a variety of discussion regarding uses to which pictures may be legitimately put. Early on I was quite excited by this myself though somewhat disappointed that my pictures have not yet been stolen - at least as far as I know

Several people I know have discovered that their pictures were beineg used in an unauthorised way on the net - particularly from the Flickr site which in some ways encourages this sort of ’sharing’. To be fair to Flickr, the site does subscribe to a system of licensing based around the Collective Commons system but the raison d’etre of the site is sharing and many people either do not respect or are unaware of their rights and responsibilities in this respect. This problem has led several folk to remove their pictures from the Flickr site.

Possible Remedies

How can we protect ourselves?

1. Post low res images
2. Watermark the images
3. Sign or otherwise mark the images
4. Subscribe to a web image tracking service
5. Disabling right click using java
6. Be vigilant when surfing around
7. Never publish to the net

At present my pictures are protected bey being at a low resolution on the net mainly for download speed, but also to make it harder for people to get decent quality prints. Thus far I have been asked by several people for prints or the files and in the main I have been happy to allow this - particularly where I have built up some kind of relatioship with the person.

Thus far I have not really tried the other methods I have mentioned, but I know of people who have tried all scenarios - including the last one of not publishing. This of course is the only complete protection, but it is not much fun and does not really contribute in the context of this discussion.

Personal Philosophy

All-in-all I am much more relaxed than I was four months ago when I started due to lack of bad experience on this topic. If somebody asked me I am sure I would allow them to use my image. I think I would be upset to find iit appearing with neither permission nor attribution - especially if the person were trying to pass it off as their own work.

It is easier for me to say this than, say, a professional photographer and in the end the only100% remedy is option 7 and that would make the web a much less interesting and creative arena.

How Do You Protect?

It would be interesting to hear if you have had an actual problem of theft or copying of images and also what steps you take to protect your images.

Anand yesterday mentioned on his comment to Camera Clubs that his best source of honest critiquing of his photography is emailing friends. He gets this neither from the internet nor from the club where he is a member.

This has been a discussion on a number of posts here such as Why Do We Photoblog? and Learning From Photoblogging? - my conclusion has been that most people are disatisfied with the feedback they receive.

On the whole most feedback I receive (and to be honest give) is rather vaccuous and of the ‘well done’ type without honest critique and suggestions for improvement or reasons why it is good. I am able to live with this though because every so often somebody (often it is Rock) makes a suggestion for improvement (also to be fair to me I do this every so often as well). The image I posted yesterday - Stowe Reflected: Bridge - is a good example of a series of useful feedback.

Perhaps the medium of the internet is not the right one for this sort of critique - I am primarily doing this to improve my craft.

Please comment with your thoughts on this topic.

AS my interest in photography has grown in the past couple of years, I joined a camera club in order to help me improve my craft and discuss with like minded people. My attendance at present is virtually non existent due to my extensive travel and I do miss it.

Since I have started blogging, however, the web has become my ‘photography club’. Blogging and commenting does not replace it, rather it is a complementary activity.

My experience of Buckingham Camera Club is tht it provided me with the following.

• Conversation with people who share an interest
• Advice from experienced photographers - see Learning from Photoblogging?
• Opportunity to see a wide range of work
• Critique in competition - see On Line Photo Competitions
• Forces me to print out - see Pictures on my Hard Drive

No doubt there is a wide range of other factors and it is something I miss at present. When you think about it though there is a large overlap with what we get out of photoblogging as discussed in Why Do We Photoblog?

I would be interested to hear your experience good or bad of camera/photography clubs.

Keen amateurs who make no money from photography and take pictures for sheer pleasure struggle sometimes to justify great expense on equipment. It may be unfair or a false economy, but it is a struggle to think of spending large sums on processing software when the money could be spent on a lens or a printer (see the article Pictures on My Harddrive).

Some discussion regarding the image Butterfly on Morven Photoblog raised the question of workflow and which software people use.

Currently my chosen processing software is

• RawShooter Essentials - free
• Paintshop Pro 9 - inexpensive
• Gimp 2 - free

Whilst it is no problem to believe that Photoshop is the premiere editing software, parting with £450 is just too hard to do. Paintshop has a good range of functionality and it is reported that there is a new version on the way. Right now, my workflow hardly uses a traditional editor, preferring to use the excellent Raw Shooter to convert my RAW images to their end state and using Paintshop for mundane tasks such as cropping or resizing for web publishing.

It would be great to hear what you use to process your images and why.