unnerved

[rookie]

I know it dosnt make it right but I hope it was an innocent mistake.

[Ezookiel]

The whole reason for "edit ok" is so that it doesn't take days to get some useful teaching on a photo. If a person believes they can show another how to improve their photo, and does so with "edit ok" permission, it would potentially slow the process to non-existent if they ALSO had to get specific permission repeated by PM first, when they already have it in the profile statement. If you want people to ask first, use the "ask first" option.

As for someone taking your photo off here and posting it to someone on facebook, I find that incredibly bad form. It surely has to be someone that knows you both, and that has to narrow things down a lot. Most posts on facebook have a time stamp, you could maybe help the Admin's to narrow it down, by letting them know the timestamp on the facebook post, that way they can reduce the search to only people who viewed the thread before that time.

[Mark L]

..... I really hope it's just a misunderstanding and can be resolved quickly.

Hoping you're right.
And if so, and the AP member doesn't read f/stop, they don't know you're unnerved.

[ricktas]

The site databases do not store a record of what threads people view and when, only what you post to the site.

[ricktas]

1. (Edit ok, please provide details) This is ok. But I still think that a PM to the OP would be more appropriate, prior to reposting.
2. Shelly's incident is one we know about. How many may have been downloaded without our knowledge. This may not be an isolated incident.

Don't get me wrong...... I often download an image and have a play in photoshop prior to giving critique. But I hardly ever repost and always delete it straight after.
This site has over 17,000 members, with only a small percentage of that are active. There are 164 members, and 267 guests viewing this forum as I write this. Can it be effectively policed for image theft by the small handful of admins and mods.?

The 267 guests cannot see the members photos forums!

We cannot monitor every single thing that every single member is doing on the site.

[Shelley]

The whole reason for "edit ok" is so that it doesn't take days to get some useful teaching on a photo. If a person believes they can show another how to improve their photo, and does so with "edit ok" permission, it would potentially slow the process to non-existent if they ALSO had to get specific permission repeated by PM first, when they already have it in the profile statement. If you want people to ask first, use the "ask first" option.

As for someone taking your photo off here and posting it to someone on facebook, I find that incredibly bad form. It surely has to be someone that knows you both, and that has to narrow things down a lot. Most posts on facebook have a time stamp, you could maybe help the Admin's to narrow it down, by letting them know the timestamp on the facebook post, that way they can reduce the search to only people who viewed the thread before that time.

You would think so, but I have photography friends and friends. I will be looking and trying to make a connection, but i do have a lot of acquaintances through acquaintances as well, but no one I can think of who is on this forum. I believe the person has not made themselves known to me at all on here during the time they have been on here, for whatever reason.

[Michaela]

It's pretty disappointing to know that someone would do this, Shelley. I hope you are able to find out who it was.

[Shelley]

It's pretty disappointing to know that someone would do this, Shelley. I hope you are able to find out who it was.

I will Michaela, just giving the person a chance to let me know.

[Ms Monny]

I've been thinking about this and wondered if it was an innocent action....."oh, look, there is a picture of Brooke on here!! Wow! Might show her"...said person clicks and saves image then posts on Brookes FB page thinking she/he hasn't done anything wrong, probably doesn't know Shelley or that it was a paid photo shoot and got excited to see a person she/he knows on here! Lets home she/he doesn't take too long to find this thread and contact you ASAP!

[Shelley]

I've been thinking about this and wondered if it was an innocent action....."oh, look, there is a picture of Brooke on here!! Wow! Might show her"...said person clicks and saves image then posts on Brookes FB page thinking she/he hasn't done anything wrong, probably doesn't know Shelley or that it was a paid photo shoot and got excited to see a person she/he knows on here! Lets home she/he doesn't take too long to find this thread and contact you ASAP!

Yes I agree, easily done when seeing something like that, happens all the time. Photos abound on the net and most don't know about not copying etc. , one of the reasons I don't post everywhere - Brooke posted as her cover page - so whoever copied and pasted - sent it to her by email or whatever - reason I don't know how she got it.

Brooke obviously likes the photo very much. I have asked her, just waiting for a reply.

[Allie]

Yes I agree, easily done when seeing something like that, happens all the time. Photos abound on the net and most don't know about not copying etc. , one of the reasons I don't post everywhere - Brooke posted as her cover page - so whoever copied and pasted - sent it to her by email or whatever - reason I don't know how she got it.

Brooke obviously likes the photo very much. I have asked her, just waiting for a reply.

It is still not acceptable but it is not quite as bad as putting it on FB themselves which is what I thought happened. I can understand how unsettling this would be for you. I don't know the shot concerned but I'm glad she loved the shot - but I would expect her to love your photos.

[LJG]

Shelley, this is very disappointing for you. Even if it is probably not outright theft (as it was given to the subject) it is still not the quality of image you wanted her to have, so it may leave a question mark about your ability (although in saying that even one of your low res images would still be better than most). Obviously the person who took it did not think of that. Peoples work that is given to a client must be of a certain standard, as it is their work and ability as a photographer that is on show.

Rick, I am glad you have taken that stand, it shows commitment to the integrity of the site with regards to peoples work, which is great. Nobody should ever download somebody else's images without express permission from the photographer.

I hope you get it all sorted Shelley as I would also be rattled in the same situation.

[ricktas]

For info: A software update (later in 2012) to the site will allow the mods and myself to see who has viewed threads on the site, even if the member did not comment, we will be able to see the usernames of every member who looked at a particular thread. This could be very helpful in scenario's like the one Shelley has experienced here.

[gerry]

I think just asking the person (brooke) in question would solve all this - good luck and i am sure it will all come out in the whitewash.

For info: A software update (later in 2012) to the site will allow the mods and myself to see who has viewed threads on the site, even if the member did not comment, we will be able to see the usernames of every member who looked at a particular thread. This could be very helpful in scenario's like the one Shelley has experienced here.

lol, next there will be targeted ads depending on what you look at

[WhoDo]

lol, next there will be targeted ads depending on what you look at

Umm ... you have AP confused with Failbook! Besides, all of our ads are targeted ... at photographers!

[ving]

hope it get sorted soon honest mistake or not.

[ricktas]

I think just asking the person (brooke) in question would solve all this - good luck and i am sure it will all come out in the whitewash.



lol, next there will be targeted ads depending on what you look at

Nup, that integration is already available. The only ads on AP will be at the top and bottom of every site page and those posted by the site advertisers themselves. I (like everyone else I know) really dislikes ads that are bombarded at you from every angle on websites, so AP will always remain with the ads at the top and bottom only

[gerry]

apologies to shelly for taking this a bit left field

Umm ... you have AP confused with Failbook! Besides, all of our ads are targeted ... at photographers!

Nup, that integration is already available. The only ads on AP will be at the top and bottom of every site page and those posted by the site advertisers themselves. I (like everyone else I know) really dislikes ads that are bombarded at you from every angle on websites, so AP will always remain with the ads at the top and bottom only

now what would be smart would be to monitor what threads people spend their time and and target specific photographic products to them

ie, someone spends lots of time in teh strobist forum and topics - nail them with stobist gear ads.. oh wait...now that sounds like google.

[NikonNellie]

I hope it gets sorted soon for you Shelley. Luckily I haven't had that problem yet and I hope I never will. I am always posting portrait shots on AP and always with low resolution and my logo on them. You just have to hope that everybody on AP does the right thing by you.

[Shelley]

Brooke at this stage has chosen not to tell me. Also, whoever did this has decided not to let me know. I really don't understand why they did that, when Brooke is getting the shots.