Illegally using copywrited photos

2bWednDec · November 2009

.[Poll]

alheystek · November 2009

I am not a holier than thou type of person, but I wouldn't make copies of copywrited photos unless I had permission from the photographer. The man who did our wedding photos gave us a release to print them, otherwise we wouldn't have.

2bWednDec · November 2009

I think it's insane that it's considered illegal to use for something like a cake. In my area tons of people get those photo cakes. Do the picture companies really think people will pay $250 or whatever for rights just to put the photo on a cake? That gets to me.

I haven't used photos illegally but I'm getting my LO's pics done professionally for the first time. I would love to scan and email it to people, although I am mailing them orginials as well.

momtoRaegan041008 · November 2009

Check with picture people, it may be easier than you think to get the copywrite. At portrait innovations all you do is have to ask and they will give you a piece of paper with a phone number to call to get the copywrite. At Sears if you buy the CD you have the copywrite.

Oh, and I have copied my own at home, scanned, e-mailed, posted them online without a copywrite.

preg_amy · November 2009

I hate to say it, but it makes a difference to me who the photographer is.

If it's a professional photographer that I'm friends with or who has a small business, I would be less likely to do it.

But if it's Sears or the Picture people or something, I wouldn't mind do it.

That being said, most of the small business photogs I know give you the rights immediately.

Lucky_Dragonfly · November 2009

if I'm shelling out $100+ dollars for the pictures and then I need to pay even more to get the photo cd, you bet your @ss that I am going to be making my own prints from it.

mabst196 · November 2009

I normally by the rights to the pics and just print them off myself. It ends up being cheaper than ordering picture by picture.

secuccaro · November 2009

Lucky_Dragonfly:
if I'm shelling out $100+ dollars for the pictures and then I need to pay even more to get the photo cd, you bet your @ss that I am going to be making my own prints from it.

Amen. The price of pictures is RIDICULOUS.

CelticWife · November 2009

My pet peeve! lol. But I am biased; I am a pro photographer.

When you purchase prints, most photographers are willing to give you a copyright release for something like a birthday cake for free. The release is a very limited one addressed to the bakery for a one time use. Others, like a friend of mine, charges you $5. If they aren't willing to do that you might want to find a different photographer.

The biggest problem I have with scanning photos is that people put them online without taking precautions. That photo is more then just the image itself; it is a piece of me and a product of my time, effort, and money. If that image is online I want it to say where it came from. I want to know where it is and who is using it.

If an image is uploaded to a website like myspace, facebook, or the image hosting websites, that website now owns copyright to my image to use for advertising purposes.

One of my former classmates photographs children. One of her images was scanned (you can tell by the quality) and somehow wound up on some perverted website. Now, for any photo a customer purchases, she gives them a small version to use online with a watermark in the center of the image.

LoriFalce · November 2009

Picture People has a form they can just give you. The manager at my PP gives it to me whenever I ask, at no charge, because I'm a good customer.

MegGary · November 2009

This is why we just bought all the images from our pro shoot.

k8elee03 · November 2009

I've scanned and made one or two reprints from the Picture People, but just a couple for my scrapbook. I spent a lot of money there, and I don't feel guilty about this at all.

As for an individual photographer like for my wedding or a portrait session or something, I wouldn't work with a photographer that didn't give me the copyright to the pictures. I know that this is a controversial subject, and I have a very close friend who is a photographer, and he very strongly disagrees with me. He sees his photographs as his works of art, and I get that, but I see them as photographs of me and my family. It's a different of philosophy, and it's a deal-breaker for me.

Ciconrad · November 2009

I have scanned some professiona pics and sent them to family or put them on FB only. Our family is all at least a 6+ hour drive away and I don't want to wait months to share the pics with them. I have only done that when the photographer did not have an option to purchase a CD with the images. If they offered that option, I paid for it. I would never use it as a Christmas card or print the pictures to give as gifts.

VarekaisMomma · November 2009

I will always buy the copywrite if it's an option. I usually take it in to consideration when choosing a photographer though - so if they don't offer it or it's prohibitivley expensive I would go with another person/company if able.

iris427 · November 2009

How do you people think pro photographers make a living? By charging for their services. If they don't mark up the price of prints and files, they don't make a profit and therefore, they can't pay their bills and keep their business afloat.

Illegally using copyrighted photos is just that--it's illegal and you are stealing from the photographer. If you don't like their prices, don't use their service. Did you even ask about buying the rights?

And it's copyright--as in the RIGHT to use the photos. Not copywrite.

k8elee03 · November 2009

You're right, Iris, and I should clarify that when I say that I expect to be "given" the rights to my photos, I am paying for the package that has that included. But I won't work with a pro photographer that doesn't offer the option.

Exception being the time I bought an 8by10 from the Picture People that's on the wall, and I also wanted to put in the scrapbook, so I scanned and printed it rather than buying another sheet. But with the 100s of dollars that I spent with them, I'm OK with my one count of theft.

MrsTotty · November 2009

This issue is exactly why I don't use photographers that don't give me the rights to copy and print their work on my own. I HATE buying prints from photographers. 1) they're almost ALWAYS over-priced 2) In my e-world, I need them online to email to people, not physical prints.

iris427 · November 2009

MrsTotty:
This issue is exactly why I don't use photographers that don't give me the rights to copy and print their work on my own. I HATE buying prints from photographers. 1) they're almost ALWAYS over-priced 2) In my e-world, I need them online to email to people, not physical prints.

Prints are expensive to buy because you are paying for the photographer's time and expertise in making your print look its best. Photographers need to charge enough so that they can cover their expenses, keep their equipment up to date, get paid for their time, and make a profit. For every hour a pro shoots, they often spend an hour in front of the computer working on your image to make sure the print looks good--that is time that you don't see, but that they need to be paid for.

I agree that in this day and age, people want digital files and a photographer should include that in their price list. But all this talk about being "given" the rights to the photographer's work, or that you are entitled to just use photos that you don't have the rights to because you paid a sitting fee, is ludicrous. I really don't know how you guys expect pro photographers to make money and I think some of you are being unfair. Photographers aren't making millions here; they are people like us trying to run a business and provide for their families.

MrsTotty · November 2009

iris427:

MrsTotty:
This issue is exactly why I don't use photographers that don't give me the rights to copy and print their work on my own. I HATE buying prints from photographers. 1) they're almost ALWAYS over-priced 2) In my e-world, I need them online to email to people, not physical prints.

Prints are expensive to buy because you are paying for the photographer's time and expertise in making your print looks its best. Photographers need to charge enough so that they can cover their expenses, keep their equipment up to date, get paid for their time, and make a profit. For every hour a pro shoots, they often spend an hour in front of the computer working on your image to make sure the print looks good--that is time that you don't see, but that they need to be paid for.

I agree that in this day and age, people want digital files and a photographer should include that in their price list. But all this talk about being "given" the rights to the photographer's work, or that you are entitled to just use photos that you don't have the rights to because you paid a sitting fee, is ludicrous. I really don't know how you guys expect pro photographers to make money and I think some of you are being unfair. Photographers aren't making millions here; they are people like us trying to run a business and provide for their families.

I don't dissagree with you Iris. All I'm saying is that if I have a choice between a photographer who will allow me to print my own images and one who won't ... I'm going to hire the one who will. That way, I'm not doing anything illegal.

And I'm sorry, paying $50 for a sitting fee, and then $35 for a 5x7 (as one of the popular local photo companies here does) is absolutely ridiculous.

Mrs.tlcS · November 2009

iris427:

MrsTotty:
This issue is exactly why I don't use photographers that don't give me the rights to copy and print their work on my own. I HATE buying prints from photographers. 1) they're almost ALWAYS over-priced 2) In my e-world, I need them online to email to people, not physical prints.

Prints are expensive to buy because you are paying for the photographer's time and expertise in making your print look its best. Photographers need to charge enough so that they can cover their expenses, keep their equipment up to date, get paid for their time, and make a profit. For every hour a pro shoots, they often spend an hour in front of the computer working on your image to make sure the print looks good--that is time that you don't see, but that they need to be paid for.

I agree that in this day and age, people want digital files and a photographer should include that in their price list. But all this talk about being "given" the rights to the photographer's work, or that you are entitled to just use photos that you don't have the rights to because you paid a sitting fee, is ludicrous. I really don't know how you guys expect pro photographers to make money and I think some of you are being unfair. Photographers aren't making millions here; they are people like us trying to run a business and provide for their families.

Oh, iris. We covered this last night.

It's perfectly OK to steal, so long as it's not an inconvenience for you.

CelticWife · November 2009

iris427:

MrsTotty:
This issue is exactly why I don't use photographers that don't give me the rights to copy and print their work on my own. I HATE buying prints from photographers. 1) they're almost ALWAYS over-priced 2) In my e-world, I need them online to email to people, not physical prints.

Prints are expensive to buy because you are paying for the photographer's time and expertise in making your print look its best. Photographers need to charge enough so that they can cover their expenses, keep their equipment up to date, get paid for their time, and make a profit. For every hour a pro shoots, they often spend an hour in front of the computer working on your image to make sure the print looks good--that is time that you don't see, but that they need to be paid for.

I agree that in this day and age, people want digital files and a photographer should include that in their price list. But all this talk about being "given" the rights to the photographer's work, or that you are entitled to just use photos that you don't have the rights to because you paid a sitting fee, is ludicrous. I really don't know how you guys expect pro photographers to make money and I think some of you are being unfair. Photographers aren't making millions here; they are people like us trying to run a business and provide for their families.

Thank you.

MrsJuneHawk · November 2009

secuccaro:
Lucky_Dragonfly:
if I'm shelling out $100+ dollars for the pictures and then I need to pay even more to get the photo cd, you bet your @ss that I am going to be making my own prints from it.

Amen. The price of pictures is RIDICULOUS.

No one is forcing you to pay these prices! Where do you draw the line as far as breaking the law? Making your own prints from copyrighted images IS breaking the law.

What if the shoe was on the other foot?

MrsJuneHawk · November 2009

CelticWife:
My pet peeve! lol. But I am biased; I am a pro photographer.

When you purchase prints, most photographers are willing to give you a copyright release for something like a birthday cake for free. The release is a very limited one addressed to the bakery for a one time use. Others, like a friend of mine, charges you $5. If they aren't willing to do that you might want to find a different photographer.

The biggest problem I have with scanning photos is that people put them online without taking precautions. That photo is more then just the image itself; it is a piece of me and a product of my time, effort, and money. If that image is online I want it to say where it came from. I want to know where it is and who is using it.

If an image is uploaded to a website like myspace, facebook, or the image hosting websites, that website now owns copyright to my image to use for advertising purposes.

One of my former classmates photographs children. One of her images was scanned (you can tell by the quality) and somehow wound up on some perverted website. Now, for any photo a customer purchases, she gives them a small version to use online with a watermark in the center of the image.

My feelings exactly!

People dont' look at the crappy scan and think "oh my, so and so did a really bad job with scanning these!" No. They think "Sheesh, this photographer is really crappy, look at the terrible quality of this print".

iris427 · November 2009

You know what? I spent hundreds of dollars at the grocery store last month. I hate having to spend money on food. I think next week, I'll just go in and start pocketing stuff--after all, I've already spent hundreds of dollars there, so why shouldn't I?

Come on. A $50 sitting fee and a $35 print is cheap. What should photographers be charging then? How are they supposed to run their business and pay their bills? Do you know what the bills for a studio run--rent, electrical, equipment maintenance, etc.?

Totty, I understand what you are saying about choosing a photog that will let you buy the rights--I agree with you there. But what you are saying about pricing is just not realistic. If a photographer doesn't charge a high sitting fee, doesn't charge high print fees and doesn't charge high digital file fees, as many of you seem to be advocating--how exactly are they supposed to make money?

MrsJuneHawk · November 2009

Also, don't confuse copyright with rights to reproduce. They are not the same. Unless the artist/photographer specifically transfers the copyright, it will ALWAYS lie with him. When they charge you for rights to print, they are not selling the copyright to you, they are merely allowing you to LEGALLY reproduce those images.

Apples and oranges.

lite-bright · November 2009

This is why we only use pro photographers who will give us a copyright release.

The photographer we've used for all of our family photos is reasonably priced and gives us digital proofs on CD after a session with a copyright release to do as we please with them. We can get them printed anywhere we want whenever we want, email them, splash them all over FB, use them for photo cards, whatever.

We had a similar arrangement for our wedding photos. To me, it's worth it to seek out and pay for a photographer who's willing to do that. Then I don't have to worry about or deal with copyrights!

ETA: I wouldn't expect to get digital proofs for a $50 sitting fee. Our photog charges around $200 a session and that includes 15 professional edited digital proofs. Compared to most of the professional portrait photogs I checked out, that is extremely reasonable. But it's also something we only do maybe twice a year.

KittyCatBio · November 2009

iris427:

You know what? I spent hundreds of dollars at the grocery store last month. I hate having to spend money on food. I think next week, I'll just go in and start pocketing stuff--after all, I've already spent hundreds of dollars there, so why shouldn't I?

Come on. A $50 sitting fee and a $35 print is cheap. What should photographers be charging then? How are they supposed to run their business and pay their bills? Do you know what the bills for a studio run--rent, electrical, equipment maintenance, etc.?

Totty, I understand what you are saying about choosing a photog that will let you buy the rights--I agree with you there. But what you are saying about pricing is just not realistic. If a photographer doesn't charge a high sitting fee, doesn't charge high print fees and doesn't charge high digital file fees, as many of you seem to be advocating--how exactly are they supposed to make money?

iris-i'm behind you all the way except for the bolded section. where the hell do you live that $35 for a 5X7 is cheap? i expect to pay a sitting fee, but the individual studios i use for $35 you're talking poster size. i can usually get a 8x10 and a set of wallets for $15 (no rights to reproduce)

MrsTotty · November 2009

iris427:

Totty, I understand what you are saying about choosing a photog that will let you buy the rights--I agree with you there. But what you are saying about pricing is just not realistic. If a photographer doesn't charge a high sitting fee, doesn't charge high print fees and doesn't charge high digital file fees, as many of you seem to be advocating--how exactly are they supposed to make money?

Well, I guess I understand that too Iris ... but I'm not worried about said photographer. I'm worried about my checkbook. And $85 for ONE 5x7 is ridiculous. Why would I spend that much on ONE print I can't share with anyone? What exactly is the point of that in this day and age? I'm choosing to go with the photographer that charges me $75 for an hour of photography, and a disk with 30 edited images on it.

How is that any different than price shopping for other services/products?

iris427 · November 2009

KittyCatBio:
iris427:

You know what? I spent hundreds of dollars at the grocery store last month. I hate having to spend money on food. I think next week, I'll just go in and start pocketing stuff--after all, I've already spent hundreds of dollars there, so why shouldn't I?

Come on. A $50 sitting fee and a $35 print is cheap. What should photographers be charging then? How are they supposed to run their business and pay their bills? Do you know what the bills for a studio run--rent, electrical, equipment maintenance, etc.?

Totty, I understand what you are saying about choosing a photog that will let you buy the rights--I agree with you there. But what you are saying about pricing is just not realistic. If a photographer doesn't charge a high sitting fee, doesn't charge high print fees and doesn't charge high digital file fees, as many of you seem to be advocating--how exactly are they supposed to make money?

iris-i'm behind you all the way except for the bolded section. where the hell do you live that $35 for a 5X7 is cheap? i expect to pay a sitting fee, but the individual studios i use for $35 you're talking poster size. i can usually get a 8x10 and a set of wallets for $15 (no rights to reproduce)

If I only paid a $50 sitting fee, I would expect to pay quite a bit for prints or printing rights. Anyway I'm not trying to squabble over print costs--different photographers price things differently. My point is just that photographers basically have 3 options to make money when they photograph children--the sitting fee, the prints (which can include, books, framing, etc.), and selling you the files. Something has to cost money here.

If people don't want to pay for it, they can learn to photograph their kids themselves and get prints made at Wal-Mart.

MrsTotty · November 2009

iris427:
My point is just that photographers basically have 3 options to make money when they photograph children--the sitting fee, the prints (which can include, books, framing, etc.), and selling you the files. Something has to cost money here.

I don't think anyone is saying that either the rights or the prints should be free. Or, at least I'M not saying that.