Low res images..Be careful.

..MD..

..MD..

Helen Shapiro
Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,257
Name
MonkeyDave
Edit My Images
Yes
This is a A3 printed and framed image on the wall..

The Photo was printed from a 800x533 resized for web file...

1_of_1_web_800x533.jpg


Now we would notice the low res and not be very impressed .. BUT alot of people would be happy with it and smaller photos would look better...


Be careful with your images guys...


MD
 
Blimey. :eek:

A couple of years ago, an acquaintance asked if I would remove the copyright from the images on his wedding cd he'd received. He claimed he'd no idea he'd only paid for a low res disc and the images printed or in higher res would be extra.......:nono:

Damn Cheeky!

Lisa
 
Crazyhorse said:
Blimey. :eek:

A couple of years ago, an acquaintance asked if I would remove the copyright from the images on his wedding cd he'd received. He claimed he'd no idea he'd only paid for a low res disc and the images printed or in higher res would be extra.......:nono:

Damn Cheeky!

Lisa
Click to expand...



:D I think most of us have been asked to do that at some time...:nono:


MD:thumbs:
 
I've had someone contact me through my website to ask if I could remove the watermark from a photo of her daughter so it would look better when she put it on Facebook. I politely pointed out that the whole point of the watermark was to stop people using them on Facebook and I quoted her a price for an unwatermarked. Surprisingly I never heard from her again.
 
-Rob- said:
. Surprisingly I never heard from her again.
Click to expand...

:shrug: You supprise me there matey:lol:

I always but watermarks on images that are going on facebook.. Then i know they are mine and not copies...


MD:thumbs:
 
:eek: Bloody hell.

Just goes to show I guess..........

Thanks for posting :thumbs:
 
andy_fozzy said:
:eek: Bloody hell.

Just goes to show I guess..........

Thanks for posting :thumbs:
Click to expand...


Yes this was my toughts matey..

I mean A3 aint massive but its big enough....


MD
 
towershot said:
I really enjoy togging, but just wished my images where GOOD enough to pinch............:lol::lol:
Click to expand...

Same here mate, although I have noticed that a bike racing picture I took and a water drop seem to be popular on facebook. I keep getting random comments posted on my photobucket and when I look someone else has used the picture...
 
towershot said:
I really enjoy togging, but just wished my images where GOOD enough to pinch............:lol::lol:
Click to expand...


Your kidding right..... I just been through your gallery..!!!!!!!


MD
 
Rolyratman said:
Same here mate, although I have noticed that a bike racing picture I took and a water drop seem to be popular on facebook. I keep getting random comments posted on my photobucket and when I look someone else has used the picture...
Click to expand...


I rest my case... " How many times do you reckon those images where downloaded and printed.."

I have been saying for years I wish I was good enough .. It seems now people will download my images..


MD
 
And I was worrying that I would struggle to print A3 from a full size image from my D40. Crikey from a low res one.

Makes you wonder.

Not that my pics are worth stealing. Might have to invest time into this watermarking thingie on the off chance I get better.


Tony
 
macky799 said:
Might be time to watermark tp pics then :thinking:
Click to expand...

Well the image on the wall in the 1st post is the same size as i post on here.!!!!!!!


Nuff said matey if you can get a A3from it then anyone would be happy with a 6x4 9x6


MD
 
..MD.. said:
Well the image on the wall in the 1st post is the same size as i post on here.!!!!!!!


Nuff said matey if you can get a A3from it then anyone would be happy with a 6x4 9x6


MD
Click to expand...

To true mate :thumbs:, mind you as you keep telling me no one would want my pics of castles and flowers :lol::lol::exit:
 
macky799 said:
To true mate :thumbs:, mind you as you keep telling me no one would want my pics of castles and flowers :lol::lol::exit:
Click to expand...



Lmao Mind you there are some strange folk about ... You never know..


Dave


Matt no probs matey..

Dave
 
It's a sad sign of the times that there are so many threads relating to image theft via social networking sites (etc...) featured on TP. It would be nice if everyone out there on't interweb were right and proper... shame it ain't so :(
 
specialman said:
It's a sad sign of the times that there are so many threads relating to image theft via social networking sites (etc...) featured on TP. It would be nice if everyone out there on't interweb were right and proper... shame it ain't so :(
Click to expand...



The Problem is when people scanned them in or took a photo of a photo years ago the original tog would never have known...


MD
 
i'm really confused...no offense whats the point of this thread?! sorry
 
Simples, if you think posting on the web at 800px will stop people printing your shots then think again.
 
jackbauer said:
i'm really confused...no offense whats the point of this thread?! sorry
Click to expand...



Have you posted any photos on the Net......?

If you have any of those prints could be downloaded and printed out big. By anyone....


MD
 
Thats an eye-opener. It just goes to show that the average person isn't really bothered about image quality, put the subject first. It's all art at the end of the day.
 
bomberman said:
Thats an eye-opener. It just goes to show that the average person isn't really bothered about image quality, put the subject first. It's all art at the end of the day.
Click to expand...

Thats it most are happy with any image

md
 
bomberman said:
Thats an eye-opener. It just goes to show that the average person isn't really bothered about image quality, put the subject first. It's all art at the end of the day.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of our images, no matter how bad we think they are, would be more acceptable to most folk, than Tracy Emin's "Unmade bed".
Never underestimate your own talents.
Having said that, I have yet to post an image on this forum, because I think that you are all much better than me.:)
 
andy700 said:
Having said that, I have yet to post an image on this forum, because I think that you are all much better than me.:)
Click to expand...

Honest northern talk? Don`t talk bloody rubbish Andy. We all start somewhere and there are always better photographers about. As long as you enjoy what you are doing, then that is all that matters.

So finger out of bum and post some pics...........:thumbs:
 
Just as an aside to the main thread, I host my gallery pictures 530px on the longest, nice watermarks including "buy your copy today" across the middle (as a big hint, without directly calling them thieving gits).
I recently changed the webcode so any clicks on the image take the image and place it in the shopping basket (ha!).
And for kicks I've put in the no-right click javascript (on-alert or somesuch stuff) that says roughly "thank you and check your order"when they right-click and it sticks it into the order basket.

This is all well and good, - so I've also put on some google analytics tracking to record all the right clicks on the gallery - and so here are some stats for you from the last month...
Being July everything is a bit low, but the percentage of theives,vagabonds and shoplifters seems to remain roughly the same.

6,344 absolute unique visitors
186,847 pageviews (16.88 each)
1117 visits with "an event"
image onmousedown (i.e. right click) 1,405 (unique 792) i.e. two per image being stolen.

so assuming the worst case - which is each unique visitor only right-clicks on one image (about twice it seems) - anything up to a maximum of 12.5% of my visitors are right-clicking on images. Weather they get anything is another question. One bloke tried 12 times. Must be a slow learner.

191 unique images were subsequently removed from the order basket (402 occurrences - suggesting they tried right clicking, it got added automatically so they removed it and then had another go - about twice on each image).
That means 3% were hell bent on trying to get a copy and really didn't want to buy a copy for sure.

If I told you that over this period that only 243 (3.8%) of visitors proceeded to "checkout now", then you can see why a 12% potential shoplifting rate is of concern, and a 3% hardnosed fraternity could still roughly double my sales. I'd almost be rich this time next year Rodney if I could get this scam to work.:thumbs:

What I would dearly love is the ability to somehow get their email address and send them a paypal request. (having looked into the paypal donate button and making that pop-up, it's all well and good - but you can't get the money if you don't have a pro merchant account !):bang:

Perhaps I'll make it pop up with a charitable donation box on justgiving instead ? hmm.:thinking:

So you have some scale behind all the numbers - I host about 300,000 images from about the previous 4 months on my gallery...

Basically if I can get 1% of visitors of the 12% who shoplift to become buyers - I'd improve my turnover by 25%. How barmy is that.:bonk:

and... All suggestions to improve sales conversion are welcomed... :)
 
^^^ Thats amazing.

Still doesn't stop the good old Print Screen button though.
 
The real question which I suspect no one can answer is would the people who pinch the images otherwise pay for them? if not then you are not actually losing any income! I suspect many will take them for their facebook image then replace it next week on whebever. If they couldnt pinch it they probably wouldnt be fussed as they dont put much value on a photo anyway.

back to econmics lessons, would you sell more if you priced lower and therefore make more money? Supply and demand really is underneath all this....

(95% of music downloaded last year was pirated, its become an expectation to get stuff free on the web........not saying its right, just the way it is)
 
foggy4ever said:
Simples, if you think posting on the web at 800px will stop people printing your shots then think again.
Click to expand...

I've discovered quite a few of my sports shots on facebook as that's a downsize from 800px to 604px.
This year everything will be watermarked. It's my default export now in lightroom.
 
Richard Peters said:
Can you post a close up photo of the print please? :)
Click to expand...


Here is a 100% crop from the original post on the wall

1_of_1_crop.jpg



Ian I belive it would have been about 140k it would have been saved at 800x533 and under 200kb " for TP rules"

Regards

MD
 
Thats really not that bad given a more normal viewing distance I guess it would look just like a bit of soft focus had been applied.

Strikes me the person wanted the image, but not at the price you wanted to charge? They would have paid around £10 for an A3 so the image had value to them, it's a question of how much............
 
ShootaSal said:
Just as an aside to the main thread, I host my gallery pictures 530px on the longest, nice watermarks including "buy your copy today" across the middle (as a big hint, without directly calling them thieving gits).
I recently changed the webcode so any clicks on the image take the image and place it in the shopping basket (ha!).
And for kicks I've put in the no-right click javascript (on-alert or somesuch stuff) that says roughly "thank you and check your order"when they right-click and it sticks it into the order basket.

This is all well and good, - so I've also put on some google analytics tracking to record all the right clicks on the gallery - and so here are some stats for you from the last month...
Being July everything is a bit low, but the percentage of theives,vagabonds and shoplifters seems to remain roughly the same.

6,344 absolute unique visitors
186,847 pageviews (16.88 each)
1117 visits with "an event"
image onmousedown (i.e. right click) 1,405 (unique 792) i.e. two per image being stolen.

so assuming the worst case - which is each unique visitor only right-clicks on one image (about twice it seems) - anything up to a maximum of 12.5% of my visitors are right-clicking on images. Weather they get anything is another question. One bloke tried 12 times. Must be a slow learner.

191 unique images were subsequently removed from the order basket (402 occurrences - suggesting they tried right clicking, it got added automatically so they removed it and then had another go - about twice on each image).
That means 3% were hell bent on trying to get a copy and really didn't want to buy a copy for sure.

If I told you that over this period that only 243 (3.8%) of visitors proceeded to "checkout now", then you can see why a 12% potential shoplifting rate is of concern, and a 3% hardnosed fraternity could still roughly double my sales. I'd almost be rich this time next year Rodney if I could get this scam to work.:thumbs:

What I would dearly love is the ability to somehow get their email address and send them a paypal request. (having looked into the paypal donate button and making that pop-up, it's all well and good - but you can't get the money if you don't have a pro merchant account !):bang:

Perhaps I'll make it pop up with a charitable donation box on justgiving instead ? hmm.:thinking:

So you have some scale behind all the numbers - I host about 300,000 images from about the previous 4 months on my gallery...

Basically if I can get 1% of visitors of the 12% who shoplift to become buyers - I'd improve my turnover by 25%. How barmy is that.:bonk:

and... All suggestions to improve sales conversion are welcomed... :)
Click to expand...

Dude. Sunday morning. You need shot.
 
Dave Pickett said:
(95% of music downloaded last year was pirated, its become an expectation to get stuff free on the web........not saying its right, just the way it is)
Click to expand...

One of the most sensible posts here (not saying the others aren't :D)
But it's a fact of life, people always want something for nothing and you won't stop it as long as you have a hole in your arse, be it photos, music or Computer programs.
 
Dave Pickett said:
Thats really not that bad given a more normal viewing distance I guess it would look just like a bit of soft focus had been applied.

Strikes me the person wanted the image, but not at the price you wanted to charge? They would have paid around £10 for an A3 so the image had value to them, it's a question of how much............
Click to expand...



This is a image I had printed myself to see what it would look like.



MD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top