Photo security TEST, i need your help. (computer big shouts)

[MikaGrin]

Hi guys, today i want to test the security of my galleries and photos, in fact i need your help.

I have set one of my gallery (still visible to the world) to the maximum level of security possible on smugmug, here is the link to these gallery:

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#468018204_Kfb4Y

The challenge i propose to you is to try to copy or steal anyway you possibly can (and in a reasonable resolution) the photo on this gallery.

Good look, and you can comeback at anytime with your comment on this subject.

Thank you very much, Mika.:thumb

[Allen]

Hi guys, today i want to test the security of my galleries and photos, in fact i need your help.

I have set one of my gallery (still visible to the world) to the maximum level of security possible on smugmug, here is the link to these gallery:

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#468018204_Kfb4Y

The challenge i propose to you is to try to copy or steal anyway you possibly can (and in a reasonable resolution) the photo on this gallery.

Good look, and you can comeback at anytime with your comment on this subject.

Thank you very much, Mika.:thumb
Like this? Can do any size you allow up to O. External links have to be on though.

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/photos/632261350_y734J-S.jpg

[MikaGrin]

Like this? Can do any size you allow up to O. External links have to be on though.

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/photos/632261350_y734J-S.jpg
What do you mind, than it's not possible for you to copy my photo?

my gallery is at is maximum security level now, but can you tell me why some guys i challenge to copy them, they can easily do it.

Here is the link here they have copied and publish 1 of my photo to prove than my gallery security is not that great:

http://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,71260.30.html

and here the link they have copied the photo from and in + in a not to bad resolution:
Are they taking screen snaps ???

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#632258321_N36rW

:scratch (http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#632258321_N36rW)

so the thing is what can i do to make my photo virtually impossible to copy or steal, but in the same time to be visible to the world?????

can you guys comeback to me on this one than i my opinion is a very big security issue, Mika

Also, is it possible for smugmug to make the screen shots impossible, or let say to crypt the screen when a screen recording application want to copy photo on galleries?

[Allen]

What do you mind, than it's not possible for you to copy my photo?

my gallery is at is maximum security level now, but can you tell me why some guys i challenge to copy them, they can easily do it.

Here is the link here they have copied and publish 1 of my photo to prove than my gallery security is not that great:

http://www.chassimages.com/forum/index.php/topic,71260.30.html

and here the link they have copied the photo from and in + in a not to bad resolution:
Are they taking screen snaps ???

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#632258321_N36rW

:scratch (http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Mariage/Mariage2/9431143_enHKe#632258321_N36rW)

so the thing is what can i do to make my photo virtually impossible to copy or steal, but in the same time to be visible to the world?????

can you guys comeback to me on this one than i my opinion is a very big security issue, Mika

Also, is it possible for smugmug to make the screen shots impossible, or let say to crypt the screen when a screen recording application want to copy photo on galleries?
The red is all they need if external links are on in the gallery. Other wise
screen print is the only other way I know. Change the size from S to M, L, XL or
anything bigger you allow in the gallery and just open in browser and save
image. Watermarking is to only deterrent.

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/photos/632261350_y734J-S.jpg

[Andy]

Mika, you've blocked external links, blocked all the largest sizes, right click protect and you've watermarked. If you leave these settings on, then the only photo anyone could get is a -M size photo (by digging in their browser cache or screen-grabbing).

[MikaGrin]

Mika, you've blocked external links, blocked all the largest sizes, right click protect and you've watermarked. If you leave these settings on, then the only photo anyone could get is a -M size photo (by digging in their browser cache or screen-grabbing).

As you say, i have turn on all the max security features, but is there anyway to stop people from digging in their browser cache or screen-grabbing?

Mika

[Andy]

As you say, i have turn on all the max security features, but is there anyway to stop people from digging in their browser cache or screen-grabbing?

MikaNo. And this is not a SmugMug, thing, Mika, it's just a fact on the internet.

[MikaGrin]

No. And this is not a SmugMug, thing, Mika, it's just a fact on the internet.

Ok, thank, you, Andy :D

[jfriend]

The most foolproof protection is password protection and only give the password to people you trust. Obviously, that isn't always practical.

The next strongest protection is a combination of limiting the largest size made available on the internet (to something ilke L or XL) and watermarking. Limiting the size means that Smugmug will simply not make the larger sizes available on the internet, but originals can still be used for print orders. This will not prevent people from stealing the smaller sizes so that's why the second part is watermarking. A tastefully done, semi-transparent watermark will render thefts unusable for small prints and, if used on facebook or something like that, they will contain your watermark.

I don't recommend right-click protection at all. It doesn't even slow down someone who knows how a browser works or who uses screen capture and it can slow down the perceived loading of your page. It only deters people who don't know much. You can use it if you want, but don't count on it actually protecting anything.

Lastly, remember that if you are selling prints, you have to strike a balance between giving your viewers the best possible viewing experience that encourages honest people to buy and locking down your images. I've been so seller's sites who have locked down their images so tight that I can't even assess the quality of the images - thus I won't buy anything. Because a theft by someone who wouldn't have bought anything anyway doesn't actually cost you anything (other than some wounded pride), your entire objective is to maximize sales, not to prevent theft. If a configuration of your site allowed 10 images to be stolen, but you sold 15 more prints because of the better presentation on the internet, that would actually be a better business decision that one which prevented all theft, but also didn't get those additional 15 print sales.

[eddief]

I like water marks the best, they're SO ANNOYING! And you can't replace what the water mark covers in the photo. I think that's the best security ever! :)

[denisegoldberg]

I like water marks the best, they're SO ANNOYING! And you can't replace what the water mark covers in the photo. I think that's the best security ever! :)
Be very careful. I think many watermarks are so annoying that I won't bother to look at the photos. You can create a tasteful watermark, or you can create an annoying watermark.

Yes, I know, I do use a watermark along the edge of my photos. The edges work fine for my eyes, but the watermarks that don't allow me to see the photograph, the ones that are truly annoying - that gallery will get closed immediately.

--- Denise

[MikaGrin]

No. And this is not a SmugMug, thing, Mika, it's just a fact on the internet.

Hi Andy, where in the forum can i talk with people about copyright and integrating méta-data inside the photo files.

Thank you, Mika

[MikaGrin]

Be very careful. I think many watermarks are so annoying that I won't bother to look at the photos. You can create a tasteful watermark, or you can create an annoying watermark.

Yes, I know, I do use a watermark along the edge of my photos. The edges work fine for my eyes, but the watermarks that don't allow me to see the photograph, the ones that are truly annoying - that gallery will get closed immediately.

--- Denise
What do you think about this one:

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Fine-Art-Print/MB-big-give-away/IMG0238/713336769_J3Mbx-L-1.jpg (http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Fine-Art-Print/MB-big-give-away/10320446_46Vod/1/#713336769_J3Mbx-A-LB)

Thank you to give me your opinion, Mika

[Andy]

Hi Andy, where in the forum can i talk with people about copyright and integrating méta-data inside the photo files.

Thank you, Mika
Pro Sales Support

[MikaGrin]

Pro Sales Support

Thank you, and also Mary Christmas and happy holidays Andy!

[MikaGrin]

The most foolproof protection is password protection and only give the password to people you trust. Obviously, that isn't always practical.

The next strongest protection is a combination of limiting the largest size made available on the internet (to something ilke L or XL) and watermarking. Limiting the size means that Smugmug will simply not make the larger sizes available on the internet, but originals can still be used for print orders. This will not prevent people from stealing the smaller sizes so that's why the second part is watermarking. A tastefully done, semi-transparent watermark will render thefts unusable for small prints and, if used on facebook or something like that, they will contain your watermark.

I don't recommend right-click protection at all. It doesn't even slow down someone who knows how a browser works or who uses screen capture and it can slow down the perceived loading of your page. It only deters people who don't know much. You can use it if you want, but don't count on it actually protecting anything.

Lastly, remember that if you are selling prints, you have to strike a balance between giving your viewers the best possible viewing experience that encourages honest people to buy and locking down your images. I've been so seller's sites who have locked down their images so tight that I can't even assess the quality of the images - thus I won't buy anything. Because a theft by someone who wouldn't have bought anything anyway doesn't actually cost you anything (other than some wounded pride), your entire objective is to maximize sales, not to prevent theft. If a configuration of your site allowed 10 images to be stolen, but you sold 15 more prints because of the better presentation on the internet, that would actually be a better business decision that one which prevented all theft, but also didn't get those additional 15 print sales.

Thank you very much for all your advice than i take very seriously, Mika:thumb

What do you think about my watermark:

http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Fine-Art-Print/MB-big-give-away/IMG0238/713336769_J3Mbx-L-1.jpg (http://michael-bastia.smugmug.com/Fine-Art-Print/MB-big-give-away/10320446_46Vod/1/#713336769_J3Mbx-A-LB)

I can eventually make it more transparent, but for it work like that.