At the end of my video is a link that gives viewers the ability to "share" my video... I don't want to share. How do I get rid of this option?

Sorry Anthony, there's no option for suppressing that.

Originally Posted by Andy Sorry Anthony, there's no option for suppressing that.

So if I have a performance piece from a dance company its out there for all to steal? Not a very good business model:(

Originally Posted by brandofamily So if I have a performance piece from a dance company its out there for all to steal? Not a very good business model:(

Yeah I think that should be a bug, you should be able to disable shareing in the gallery, and then have the share button not show up. We'll check on it, Anthony.

Originally Posted by Andy Yeah I think that should be a bug, you should be able to disable shareing in the gallery, and then have the share button not show up. We'll check on it, Anthony.

Thanks... I'd like to move my videos to SM from Google...

Yeah I think that should be a bug, you should be able to disable shareing in the gallery, and then have the share button not show up. We'll check on it, Anthony.

If I'm not mistaken this is how it works, unless there's something I'm missing.

Originally Posted by Andy Yeah I think that should be a bug, you should be able to disable shareing in the gallery, and then have the share button not show up. We'll check on it, Anthony.

Any progress on this?

Originally Posted by greghonda Any progress on this?

I was wondering the same thing as I was reviewing some old code I had that used to restrict right clicking on the slideshows and printing the images. SM was able to remove the print option, therefore I figured they could remove the download/share option on the videos... I've not heard any more about this though...

Originally Posted by greghonda Any progress on this?

I'll take the no reply as nothing new on the situation...

This has been bugged/reported to the programmers. There is a bigger issue that I want to make clear. Videos from SmugMug must download to the viewers computer to play. At that point, it is very easy for them to save the file, grab it from the cache, or use one of the dozens of "stealing" apps on the internet. All they do is save or move the file to a new location on the visitors hard drive. From there, it takes a matter of simply uploading it to another location.

I agree that we should not make it easier for them. But, any web savvy kid will know how to grab the video anyway.

Originally Posted by docwalker This has been bugged/reported to the programmers. There is a bigger issue that I want to make clear. Videos from SmugMug must download to the viewers computer to play. At that point, it is very easy for them to save the file, grab it from the cache, or use one of the dozens of "stealing" apps on the internet. All they do is save or move the file to a new location on the visitors hard drive. From there, it takes a matter of simply uploading it to another location. I agree that we should not make it easier for them. But, any web savvy kid will know how to grab the video anyway.

But as you said, let's not make it easy for them... please, let's remove that button... SM did it by removing the print button from the slideshow...

"This has been bugged/reported to the programmers."

Originally Posted by docwalker There is a bigger issue that I want to make clear. Videos from SmugMug must download to the viewers computer to play. At that point, it is very easy for them to save the file, grab it from the cache, or use one of the dozens of "stealing" apps on the internet. All they do is save or move the file to a new location on the visitors hard drive. From there, it takes a matter of simply uploading it to another location.

This is a good point and is the same issue with photos. The solution for me with photos was watermarking. Will this be possible with videos?

Video watermarking is different than photo. You must should add video watermarking during the editing process before upload. It is much easier for you to control and add it then.

Originally Posted by docwalker It is much easier for you to control and add it then.

I wish it was easier, but with my workflow it isn't. The only reason I mention it is because youtube started doing that a while back. I guess it'll just be on the wish list for a few years.

Samir, I think we had this discussion before. You seem to want to skip the entire editing process and go straight to posting your videos. I can understand that to some degree. But you keep asking for some features that are currently editor functions. Processing video takes time and costs money. To provide some of what you want would probably require a drastic increase in costs. Please remember that video is (essentially) thousands of still images and every one of those would have to be regenerated. That is much easier with a single still image.

I really think you need to take a long look at your editing process. We will improve as technology advances, costs go down, etc. But for now, there are some excellent editing applications that will do what you want, today...

Originally Posted by docwalker Samir, I think we had this discussion before. You seem to want to skip the entire editing process and go straight to posting your videos. I can understand that to some degree. But you keep asking for some features that are currently editor functions. Processing video takes time and costs money. To provide some of what you want would probably require a drastic increase in costs. Please remember that video is (essentially) thousands of still images and every one of those would have to be regenerated. That is much easier with a single still image. I really think you need to take a long look at your editing process. We will improve as technology advances, costs go down, etc. But for now, there are some excellent editing applications that will do what you want, today...

We have had this discussion, and I really didn't see anything changing. Just wanted to bring up the best solution (watermarking) for the OP's issue.

As you've said, anything can be stolen from the cache. Watermarking solved this problem for still photos on SM. Now that the same issue is being brought up in video, the same solution exists. Although it's completely easier said that done.

I'm truly aware that the technical challenges for video watermarking are steep. If my workflow could be altered in such a way that I could do it efficently, I would. And if it's hard for me, it's even harder for SM.

There's some development time to make watermarking videos available. But this was also the case before custom watermarks came about for photos. I don't see it never happenning at SM, just that it will be a while. Until then, I'll just keep trying to add more people to the video watermarking bandwagon.

I agree that we will have it eventually. The one down side I see instantly when we do is people wanting to customize it.

"I have a title segment, I don't want the watermark on it"

"it shows great during x but it looks bad on Y, can you change that"

"I don't like the size being the same through the whole video as it covers aunt Marthas face"

:-) But, we cannot let that stop progress...

MPEG Streamclip has simple facility to add a small amount of text in the bottom right hand corner of the video as it is processing & converting from one format to another. It does the job well but is still quite discreet & won't cover aunt Martha's face http://www.barkersvideo.com/gallery/...571_FU95j-A-LB This simple facility should be relatively easy to implement in the SmugMug conversion process.

thanks Nigel. I had never noticed that feature. Sweet! I am loving MPEG StreamClip even more.