Flickr and the Photographer

I spent a little time this morning paging thru Flickr and the further I went the more I wondered why. Why are there so many people posting their images that can all be right-clicked saved? I randomly clicked on several of these images and many of them were 3 mb's or larger. Not that it's all that hard to get around but why doesn't Flickr disable the right-click save function? A dishonest person could easily download an entire portfolio of images and, with some strategic cropping or some content-aware Photoshop touch ups, pan them off as his own. Are there benefits to being a Flickr member that overrides this risk? My first impression what that photographers might be using Flickr as a giant billboard in hopes that it drives clicks to their site. If indeed this is their motivation then I wonder to what extent this has increased their traffic?

So if anyone here is has a clue about the relationship between Flickr and the photographer, I would be keenly interested in hearing your thoughts and to hear why so many people are posting there.

On the plus side, Flickr was filled with thousands of beautiful images. Many of the posters are very skilled in the art of photography, almost to an intimidating level of excellence. It seems a great place to visit if you're low on new ideas or need some photographic inspiration.

Dave can you see if you can access my photos please, and even right click on them!

Flickr: Scott H Murray's Photostream

It's pretty easy to get around a disabled right click anyway. At least for me. A better way to hide photo URL's is through some java or flash.

Scott - I can see your original file sizes from pages like this: All sizes | Berry Springs NT | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

jdeg said:

It's pretty easy to get around a disabled right click anyway. At least for me.

Scott - I can see your original file sizes from pages like this: All sizes | Berry Springs NT | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Click to expand...

Are you able to right click and save the photo? I am not that concerned as mine is a hobby but would be good to know if you can or cant.

muzza22au said:

Dave can you see if you can access my photos please, and even right click on them!

Flickr: Scott H Murray's Photostream

Click to expand...

No, I can't. So far you're the only one that had disabled that function. I wonder why others don't disable it. And like jdeg points out, it's pretty easy to get around that.

Dave_W said:

No, I can't. So far you're the only one that had disabled that function. I wonder why others don't disable it. And like jdeg points out, it's pretty easy to get around that.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that Dave, I know its only a deterrent and hopefully now all my large sized images are unavailable aswell.

Also, I read this when it was published: How Yahoo Killed Flickr and Lost the Internet

You can disable downloads of your images. It's in the settings. I did this for mine right from the start

Thank you, pretty interesting article...

Pat in NH

I think we all need to realize that there is no silver bullet solution to this. There are only deterrents. If someone is determined enought to copy an image, they will do so. You can put all the watermarks, copyright warnings you want, most people bent on stealing images don't care about this. The internet is such a convenient place to go, so easy to post pictures up on numerous websites. It is a way to get your work out to millions of people instantly. But, with such ease, comes many downfalls. You just have to accept the risk. You can not control something that is not-controllable. Aren't most pro togs where they are because of the "jobs" they have done and not because of posting pics up on Flickr? Just saying

AC016 said:

Aren't most pro togs where they are because of the "jobs" they have done and not because of posting pics up on Flickr? Just saying

Click to expand...

I don't know, are they? Has the internet changed this dynamic and not everyone is yet aware of it or ?

Dave_W said:

I don't know, are they? Has the internet changed this dynamic and not everyone is yet aware of it or ?

Click to expand...

I don't know either, that is why i was asking the question. It's only my opinion, but besides being able to share photos with friends/family alot quicker (send a link instead of a bunch of photos in an email), i see no point in an aspiring photographer throwing up all his work onto flickr. What is it that they would accomplish by doing this? <again, i am asking. Would it not be best to develop a website, start small/local and then build up from there? I just don't understand why people throw up every single photo onto these websites and then are surprised that one of their photos is stolen! Same goes with FB users who post every nuance of their life on the internet and then are shocked to learn that the information go into the hands of other people!! Ugghhhh..... If you don't want it stolen, if you would never say it in public, if you would never share it with anyone else, why post it on the internet!? Anyhow, i digress.... hockey is going to be back in a few weeks.

That's a good question. One thing that strikes me about the business of photography is that the money is not in actual photographs, rather it is in teaching others how to make photographs. Look at most successful photographers and you'll see nearly all of them give seminars and/or write books and take students on various photo safaris. There is currently so many people taking digital photographs (note I did not call them "photographers") and more and more people entering the fray that the market for professional photography is getting smaller and smaller. We even see it here on Nikonites. There's been scores of posters who land here and complain about how "newbies" are taking away their wedding jobs and are either doing a poor job of it or are charging ridiculously low prices. So many people are coming to our hobby either thru point-n-shoots or iPad's and cell phones, the potential for a professionals focusing solely on images is getting smaller and smaller by the day.

But with every door that closes another is opened. Flickr and other such sites offer the potential to publicise yourself to a world wide audience. Not so much with selling the actual photos but in proving you're a skilled photographer. In this brave new world of a now maturing internet, such a photographer could parley their web presence into a very lucrative career in writing books and hosting seminars. I can't even count the number of emails I get announcing a new seminar or on-site photo shoot, only $99 if you register today! And you don't even have to be a good photographer to take advantage of the boom in digital photography. Take Scott Kelby or Martin Evening for instance, they're making a ton of money teaching computer skills, not photographic skills, to new and semi advanced photographers.

Dave_W said:

That's a good question. One thing that strikes me about the business of photography is that the money is not in actual photographs, rather it is in teaching others how to make photographs. Look at most successful photographers and you'll see nearly all of them give seminars and/or write books and take students on various photo safaris. There is currently so many people taking digital photographs (note I did not call them "photographers") and more and more people entering the fray that the market for professional photography is getting smaller and smaller. We even see it here on Nikonites. There's been scores of posters who land here and complain about how "newbies" are taking away their wedding jobs and are either doing a poor job of it or are charging ridiculously low prices. So many people are coming to our hobby either thru point-n-shoots or iPad's and cell phones, the potential for a professionals focusing solely on images is getting smaller and smaller by the day.

But with every door that closes another is opened. Flickr and other such sites offer the potential to publicise yourself to a world wide audience. Not so much with selling the actual photos but in proving you're a skilled photographer. In this brave new world of a now maturing internet, such a photographer could parley their web presence into a very lucrative career in writing books and hosting seminars. I can't even count the number of emails I get announcing a new seminar or on-site photo shoot, only $99 if you register today! And you don't even have to be a good photographer to take advantage of the boom in digital photography. Take Scott Kelby or Martin Evening for instance, they're making a ton of money teaching computer skills, not photographic skills, to new and semi advanced photographers.

Click to expand...

Good way of putting it. To me, there is something wrong when photographers start to teach computer software skills, instead of how to take the best photo you can in the first place. The title "Photographer" once meant a profession, just like "Engineer". let's hope that there is not any part-time, wannabe Engineers being hired to do professional jobs, lol

Musicians have been facing this for a while now. At least it's a little better for photographers because we can watermark our shared images in such a way that they can't be shared or reproduced without defacing the image or including the information. Then it's up to us to try and find it as it spreads. Do I care if someone likes my image on flickr enough to print it and stick it on their wall without paying for it? No. I'm a hobbyist so if nothing else the idea is flattering. I share my images for friends to see (it's the perpetual family slideshow) and for comments to learn from. I can see why it's much more an issue for the pro. I see no reason why anyone looking to make money in the field has images anywhere that is considered a "sharing" site, and why they don't watermark the crap out of their work. It sucks when people take your stuff, but I equate it to leaving the front door of your house unlocked. Anyone can walk in, and you hope that they're all decent enough that if they walk out with something of yours they at least leave you a note letting you know they have it. If they steal from you then it's your own doing - next time keep your door locked. You have less company, but all that's yours stays yours, even if no one knows you have it.

The internet has changed the dynamic around all media and information protection and copyrights. It's become so that the only people who can do a decent job at protecting their stuff are the ones who have already made enough money that they can pay people to make sure it doesn't spread once it's out there. It's no longer possible to come from nowhere and think you're going to make a lot of money producing art - some will, but it's a fluke. The only way to earn that living, as was mentioned, is the "value added" stuff. Teaching, writing books (that hopefully will not appear as pdf's on a torrent sight), lecturing, etc. The art has become, once again as it was decades ago, its own reward. If you can scratch a living out of it, all the better. But you better be in it for the joy of making it.

For me, as long as the site is allowing some level of protection, and isn't making changes to user agreements constantly threatening to make a profit off of what I give them for free - or pay them to store - then I'm OK with it. Otherwise it's just me and a screen saver.

Slightly off topic but related:

Craigslist post I just found from today in Los Angeles area: (so in a saturated market this is how low prices are getting)

[h=2]Headshot Photography in Mid-Wilshire[/h] For actors, musicians, dancers, comedians, models, business executives, singles for online dating. Your photo session is done in a relaxed professional environment. The comfortable and spacious studio space includes a changing and makeup area, garment rack, snacks and bottled water. There is free and metered street parking and public transit is one block away.


$25 Headshot Craigslist Special
* Includes 1 look (outfit change).
* Your choice of 3 final images for retouching.
* Your photos are retouched, cropped and resized for print and online use.
* Includes title design with your contact information.
* Session time: 1 hour. Turnaround time: 48 hours.
* Delivery: online download.
$50 Headshot Craigslist Special
* Includes 3 looks (outfit changes).
* Your choice of 7 final images for retouching.
* Your photos are retouched, cropped and resized for print and online use.
* Includes title design with your contact information.
* Session time: 3 hours. Turnaround time: 72 hours.
* Delivery: online download and CD-ROM of all images mailed to you.

Wow, doesn't seem they would make much!

Yeah $50 for 3 hours of work + what ever time to process them, seems like they would make more working at In-n-Out plus you get free burgers!! mmm

Here in San Diego there's a group called San Diego Model shots (Glamour Photographers International) and I ran into them one day at Balboa park. They offer actors and models free portfolio shots and they actually charge the photographers $10 to take the shots which are then given to the models in exchange for their sittings. Since I was new and just walked in the host said I could join in for free. I think this says just about all that needs to be said for the long term prospects of professional model photographers.

Here's a couple images from that day. I was very unprepared for these shots and should have used some fill flash like many of the other photographers (some of whom seemed a little creepy to me!)