Originally Posted by BroPhoto Image has been removed. Could have been the same fleaBay seller and got scared. GaryB

Yes, I'm pretty sure the eBay seller used to ImageShack to host the photo for the ebay ad he posted. It disappeared right after I emailed the copyright violation notice to them.

Originally Posted by Patti ... Time for the big ugly watermarks across photos I guess.

Hi Patti,

Thanks for posting this thread up and pleased you managed to nip this situation in the bud!

Was interested by the final remark you made in your original post, as this is a move I'm trying to come to grips with myself right now; while I've always added a subtle copyright symbol next to my name in the lower corner of any photos I post up on the net, and more recently added my SmugMug address to that, it's been recommended to me that I use what you refer to as "the big ugly watermark", which is the way I regard them too.

I took a look through some of the galleries on you SmugMug site and noticed that you haven't actually taken this leap, and I'd be interested know if this is something you've yet to get around to doing or if perhaps you've changed your mind and decided to stick with the much more subtle copyright in the lower LH corner.

Thanks for your time!

I finally got around to putting big red watermarks across a few of my Police tour photos after finding the same shot of Sting on ebay again. This time the seller had the contact info on the original seller. Hehehe...

Thanks for your response Patti, much appreciated!

Though sorry to hear it happened to you again, real pleased to know that you uncovered another thief on eBay and managed to find out who it was!

BTW, I read quite a bit yesterday on other people's threads regarding trying to find an acceptable balance between adequate protection of one's images and not making watermarks so obtrusive as to put a viewer's pleasure off looking at more of one's photos, and I even posted up a thread of my own seeking recommendations and alternatives.

I had a couple of guys offer suggestions that I'll be looking more into today. The first (from AceCo55) is to "try is give the text an inner bevel/emboss effect, then set the FILL to 0%. That will remove the text but show the effect. It will be readable on a much wider variety of backgrounds. You can also drop the opacity if you still feel the text effect is too strong."

The second suggestion offered was by Helvegr, who wrote, "I've alwasy been very intrigued by Digimarc (http://www.digimarc.com/digimarc-for-images) for doing watermarks. I've never actually used them, but they seem like a great compromise between the classic watermark and nothing at all.

Plus I think with their professional package, their image search will even find your images on the web that contain your digital watermark.

I suppose that is the other consideration with watermarking. On one hand, you try to watermark your image to the point that nobody will want to even try to steal it. The other idea is that you are simply more prepared to catch the people that do steal it. I think the digimarc idea is toward the latter."

Hope AceCo55 and Helvegr won't mind me pasting their suggestions here, but seeing as it appears that so many people - including your good self Patti - are still hoping to find better ways of protecting photos while not at the expense of turning viewers away because of unsightly watermarks, thought I should take the initiative.

Thanks again for your reply Patti and wishing you a wonderful weekend ahead!

P.S. I've loved Sting and The Police ever since I saw their very first television appearance on a UK television programme called The Old Grey Whistle Test back in (probably?) the 70s. Really like your concert photos, thanks for sharing; must have been great being there seeing and listening to them live!

Thanks Ashley. I'll check it out.

Thanks for the kind remarks about the Police shots. I've photographed Sting many times in concert. He's now using one on his PR page which is a bit of a thrill for this longtime fan. Bought him a pint in Newcastle back in February. He was very gracious.

Originally Posted by Patti Thanks Ashley. I'll check it out. Thanks for the kind remarks about the Police shots. I've photographed Sting many times in concert. He's now using one on his PR page which is a bit of a thrill for this longtime fan. Bought him a pint in Newcastle back in February. He was very gracious.

No worries Patti, happy to share

Wow! I can only imagine how thrilled you must have been seeing Sting using one of your captures on his PR page, I dare say that did wonders for your reputation too, congratulations! And on top of that you not only got to meet him buy bought him a pint ... I guess sharing a few minutes on stage with him is next on your list

BTW, as coincidence would have it, just this morning I received an automated email from Getty Images announcing their new watermark. Thought you might be interested in seeing how they're doing it now if only to show new ideas: http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/Creativ...w_Watermark_em

All the best!

It sounds like someone stole one of your shots, printed it, then sold it to this guy who thought he owned a legitimate copy. Correct? My question is how the original person got a high enough quality version of this shot to print it in the first place. I know that for many of my school and social galleries, I allow downloading of the original size and tell people they are free to use it as they see fit. But my other galleries--especially the ones that were done for professional reasons--can only be viewed as relatively small screen versions; may be OK for FB or something a bit bigger, but it would never make it as a full-sized print. Just curious...

Anyway, glad you got it resolved!

Originally Posted by jhefti It sounds like someone stole one of your shots, printed it, then sold it to this guy who thought he owned a legitimate copy. Correct? My question is how the original person got a high enough quality version of this shot to print it in the first place. I know that for many of my school and social galleries, I allow downloading of the original size and tell people they are free to use it as they see fit. But my other galleries--especially the ones that were done for professional reasons--can only be viewed as relatively small screen versions; may be OK for FB or something a bit bigger, but it would never make it as a full-sized print. Just curious... Anyway, glad you got it resolved!

Hi John,

I know you're really addressing Patti, but having taken an interest in what you wrote I thought I'd chime in!

Taking a few random examples from your "Outside" and sports galleries, I see the file sizes you allow people to download (by way of screen grabs) are between 1-1.3 MB. Not sure what your definition is of a "full-sized print" but I think you may be a little surprised at the quality you'd get printing an 8x12 of any of those. To the discerning eye it'll be far from perfect, but for someone who's not than concerned with accurate colour tones and tack-sharp detail, I reckon they'd be more than happy with the result if the content of the image is really what they're after.

Was also interested to note that you don't even use the smallest of copyright signature on your images.

BTW, did enjoy looking through your work, you have a very nice portfolio, oh, and rest assured that I've already deleted the screen grabs I borrowed

Originally Posted by Lemur Lover BTW, did enjoy looking through your work, you have a very nice portfolio, oh, and rest assured that I've already deleted the screen grabs I borrowed

LOL! Glad to hear I won't see you selling my images on eBay!

Thanks for explaining this. I can't imagine a poster-sized image coming from a screen grab--even ones as large as mine--but to the undiscerning eye who just likes the subject, perhaps the technical quality is not that important.

And yes, I do not watermark my images, aside from comps that I send out for layout purposes to clients. Honestly, I don't really care if they are stolen; I don't make a living from this--aside from professional sports shooting, which is still just for fun--and have no plans to make it anything more than a hobby.

Thanks for the kind words! Your work is stunning (to choose an over-used adjective). I'll bet that Thailand has a wealth of subjects--natural and otherwise--for your shooting pleasure. I visited years ago, before I took up shooting, and just loved the country!

Originally Posted by jhefti LOL! Glad to hear I won't see you selling my images on eBay! Thanks for explaining this. I can't imagine a poster-sized image coming from a screen grab--even ones as large as mine--but to the undiscerning eye who just likes the subject, perhaps the technical quality is not that important. And yes, I do not watermark my images, aside from comps that I send out for layout purposes to clients. Honestly, I don't really care if they are stolen; I don't make a living from this--aside from professional sports shooting, which is still just for fun--and have no plans to make it anything more than a hobby. Thanks for the kind words! Your work is stunning (to choose an over-used adjective). I'll bet that Thailand has a wealth of subjects--natural and otherwise--for your shooting pleasure. I visited years ago, before I took up shooting, and just loved the country!

Hi John,

Thanks for taking a look and some of my work and of course real pleased you like what you saw! Most countries in Southeast Asia have advertising slogans, which you hear every now on them on TV or see on billboards, by way of tourism authorities attempting to attract increasing numbers of visitors. “Malaysia Truly Asia” is pretty good, but for many year now it's simply been “Amazing Thailand”, which is just about the most succinct yet perfectly apt way of putting it that I could possibly think of to describe this county and it's people, as “amazing” can so easily mean so many things!

In the hope that Patti doesn't mind – though I suspect she too may be interested to read this! - I'll tell you a little story.

Having invested most of our savings over the course of just over a year and a half while pursuing my lifelong dream of becoming a professional wildlife photographer, as well as a 22 year dream of finding a way to work at our local zoo so that I could finally have an opportunity to help in any way I can improve the living conditions of animals I love, my wife and I were accepted into the fold and giving permission to construct and open our fine art photography gallery within their grounds.

That was just over three months ago, and since then, aside from the percentage we donate from the sale of our prints to the zoo, I've been helping out in various other ways, including photographing all the newborn and young animals there to help document their growth and development so that my images can be used to help promote the zoo's excellent reputation for their highly successful breeding programmes; I was asked to offer ideas on how I felt I could help bring more attention to the zoo by the directors when we first started, and this was one a number of ideas I had that they readily embraced and continue to support.

By the latter part of March I'd been photographing the three Lioness sisters as cubs since they were a week old at regular intervals, and for the day they were set to be introduced to the general public for the first time, one month after they were born, the zoo's director asked if I'd be willing to set up an exhibition of my work, featuring some of the photos I'd taken of them so far, in the zoo's main reception area, which of course I was more than happy to do.

Half way through the day of the event, my daughter came up with a box in her hands saying, “Hey Dad, have you seen this?” The box was packaged in clear cellophane as a product for sale would be, and through the plastic I saw a picture of what's become one of my most popular photos of one of the little Lionesses. In my immediate state of surprise and confusion, only a few of the words that were written on the box registered: “Jigsaw” and “© Ashley Vincent”!!!

To cut a long story short (seldom an easy thing for me to do, but I'll give it my best shot!), someone had downloaded not one, but 10 of the Lioness images I'd posted up in a private gallery over on our website (something I'd set up for the zoo's staff to enjoy and, seeing as the image files were small and set to a low resolution, I gave the staff permission to download any they like for personal use for things like wallpaper on laptops) and had them made into jigsaw puzzles.

Fortunately for us, the zoo's director was livid when he found out and evidently totally unaware that this had happened until we brought the matter to his attention. He held a meeting the very next day for all the heads of department to express his great disappointment and issue a warning that if he ever sees something like this again, whoever is responsible is as good as gone; everyone knew who was behind it on this occasion, but no direct finger was pointed (it was someone fairly high up in the chain of command) as the stern warning was deemed to be sufficient.

Thailand is indeed an amazing country, though for better or worse many of the people that make up the population (though same could be said of many other eastern countries) have no concept about copyright and think nothing of taking someone else's work for their own ends.

We don't make posters (at least not just yet), but our work is available for sale in three different size (up to A3) by way of our gallery and some of our images we also sell as postcards. While the thought of people from around the world taking and using the images I've posted up on the web without our permission of course bothers me, my main concern is that someone over here in Thailand will find ways of copying our work and selling it as cheap knock-offs.

In fairness I have to admit that, in the more than two decades I've lived over here, I've bought the odd pirated CD, DVD, and back in the early 90s I even purchased an Armani teeshirt from a man on the street who, for all he said, still left me kind of suspicious over his assertions that the teeshirt was an original! So in a way I guess I'm being a tad hypocritical; even if I've never tired to sell copyrighted material, I'm still guilty of having used it, so perhaps I've already played my part in karma and have no right to complain.

All the best for you week ahead John!

Patti: Sincerely hope you didn't mind me writing in such length on your thread, and wishing you a wonderful week ahead too!

to add to what Ziggy said,

you can also search for image without using chrome - drag and drop an image into the google image search. It will upload, analyze and search for the image.
you could also use Tineye.com