jeffreaux2
Sep-26-2008, 12:46 PM
I am not 100% sure how my image became watermarked, but I have a hunch. I apologize for any trouble it caused with the voting, and especially to Emily as I am sure she had to go through extra work to get the polls straightened out. Lastly for anyone who thought it worthy of a vote.....sorry.
In an effort to keep anyone else from having this issue in the future I will outline how I think it happened.
A month or more ago an admin at www.photographycorner.com (http://www.photographycorner.com) asked me about an interview for their smugmug corner series. Aside from the interview, I put together a smugmug gallery of some of my favorite images for them to post alongside the interview. I was to keep the gallery active until after the interview was posted...at which time I would be able to delete it as they would make copies to their own gallery to suit their purpose. I was flattered. The caliber of photographers they interview is very respectable.
Last week I was notified that the interview would be published. On a whim, I decided to put a copy of "Nearsighted" in the gallery for the interview. It would be the only image that was not a portrait of sorts. I made this copy from a gallery that I use only for the purpose of DSS Challenges, and other competitions on the net. After moving the copy I checked the DSS8 entry thread and found my image alive and well. I thought that if I had accidentally moved the original image to a different gallery it would not show at all. As you know the file names of copies in these galleries are the same as the original. I did not think to check the linking info. That interview is here (http://www.photographycorner.com/blog/2008/09/smugmug-corner-43-j-k-mann) .
Night before last, I published an article to one of my smugmug galleries. It is a "How-To" for high school senior portraits (http://jkmann.smugmug.com/gallery/6057673_NvijZ) . I then shared it with the "people" section of the Dgrin forum. One of the regular "people" contributors asked if he could post a blurb about the article on his blog. I agreed, and offered him a link to the gallery I had provided for the photographycorner interview to enable him to use an image or two of mine alongside the bit on his blog. At that point, I knew that photographycorner no longer needed the gallery, and so I did a select all and watermarked the images in that gallery. Funny thing is that the images that made it to the other user's blog were copied before the watermarks took effect and were never watermarked. My links to "Nearsighted", however, were inadvertently coming from that gallery....and so "Nearsighted" became watermarked.
I am almost positive this is what happened. I have deleted the gallery for the interview, so have no way to be 100% certain. Last check, "Nearsighted " was still visible in the entry thread. If it disappears I will know for sure!
I copy and move images regularly, and have always moved the second copy that appears in the gallery. This has proven the correct way to do it in the past. Somehow, I moved the original, and it remained linked.
I hope this is a clear explanation of what went wrong and can help someone else in the future. I hope you can also see that it was in no way meant as ill will, but rather that my intentions in these actions were in fact meant as contributory in nature to the photographic communities that I respect.
In an effort to keep anyone else from having this issue in the future I will outline how I think it happened.
A month or more ago an admin at www.photographycorner.com (http://www.photographycorner.com) asked me about an interview for their smugmug corner series. Aside from the interview, I put together a smugmug gallery of some of my favorite images for them to post alongside the interview. I was to keep the gallery active until after the interview was posted...at which time I would be able to delete it as they would make copies to their own gallery to suit their purpose. I was flattered. The caliber of photographers they interview is very respectable.
Last week I was notified that the interview would be published. On a whim, I decided to put a copy of "Nearsighted" in the gallery for the interview. It would be the only image that was not a portrait of sorts. I made this copy from a gallery that I use only for the purpose of DSS Challenges, and other competitions on the net. After moving the copy I checked the DSS8 entry thread and found my image alive and well. I thought that if I had accidentally moved the original image to a different gallery it would not show at all. As you know the file names of copies in these galleries are the same as the original. I did not think to check the linking info. That interview is here (http://www.photographycorner.com/blog/2008/09/smugmug-corner-43-j-k-mann) .
Night before last, I published an article to one of my smugmug galleries. It is a "How-To" for high school senior portraits (http://jkmann.smugmug.com/gallery/6057673_NvijZ) . I then shared it with the "people" section of the Dgrin forum. One of the regular "people" contributors asked if he could post a blurb about the article on his blog. I agreed, and offered him a link to the gallery I had provided for the photographycorner interview to enable him to use an image or two of mine alongside the bit on his blog. At that point, I knew that photographycorner no longer needed the gallery, and so I did a select all and watermarked the images in that gallery. Funny thing is that the images that made it to the other user's blog were copied before the watermarks took effect and were never watermarked. My links to "Nearsighted", however, were inadvertently coming from that gallery....and so "Nearsighted" became watermarked.
I am almost positive this is what happened. I have deleted the gallery for the interview, so have no way to be 100% certain. Last check, "Nearsighted " was still visible in the entry thread. If it disappears I will know for sure!
I copy and move images regularly, and have always moved the second copy that appears in the gallery. This has proven the correct way to do it in the past. Somehow, I moved the original, and it remained linked.
I hope this is a clear explanation of what went wrong and can help someone else in the future. I hope you can also see that it was in no way meant as ill will, but rather that my intentions in these actions were in fact meant as contributory in nature to the photographic communities that I respect.