Stealing photographs from a website for private use.

[abba]

Is it possible to stop people downloading photographs from a website and using them for their own private use without paying for them? I am speaking about a voluntary group which had hoped to sell photographs to raise funds. Members have found that the photographs are being downloaded illegally.

[the_pm]

Well, you can't stop them from being downloaded, because by the very nature of the Net, every single image on a screen is downloaded and placed in a temporary folder before it is viewed.

If these are photos for sale, they should seriously consider watermarking them. They still get downloaded, but they are essentially useless except for sale by the original owner :)

[Christina]

To add to what Paul has said, they should post low-res photos on the site with a watermark. All in all, there's not very much you can do except to take legal action.

[abba]

Thanks so much for prompt replies. Unfortunately I am no expert on photography. Christina mentioned low-res photographs. How is this done? Would it be possible to post thumbnail versions on the web so that any effort to enlarge them would reduce quality.

[abba]

Would it make sense to place the photographs on the website but with comments attached by means of say Paint Shop Pro. It would be pointless downloading them. The webmaster would still have the original copies for sale.

[the_pm]

Low-res versions are simply pictures that have been exported from the graphic design software of choice (Photoshop, Fireworks, Paint Shop Pro, etc.) as low quality JPG images. When you choose to export for Web, you set the quality level down low, so the pictures don't look at good. The good news is that this makes them less desirable for stealing. The bad news is that this makes them less desirable for purchasing too!

A watermark would work better. Put a copyright symbol and the photographer's name right across the middle of the picture in white text (unless the picture is very light, then use black), and fade it back to something unobtrusive, say 5-10% opacity. That should do the trick.

[abba]

To the_PM.Thanks so much. That is brilliant.

[chaos]

There are some other interesting options out there to add on to what was said, however they are a bit pricey. The most common is a program called Digimarc if I recall correctly:
http://www.digimarc.com/mypicturemarc/how-it-works/default.asp

Other than that though, you should just reduce the quality or put a watermark. Generally a combination of both works best. That way if they try to remove the watermark they will have a lot of quality issues to worry about and no real source material to work with.

[absolethe]

You also have to consider what people are getting when they download the photographs.

Mine are 72 ppi and only around 600 to 700 pixels wide. (You might choose to make them a little larger, but the resolution should be the same.) People can save these images to their hard drives, that's just a fact of internet life.

But I don't particularly care if they do, because they're not really getting anything out of it that I didn't intend for them to get: they're able to look at the picture on their monitor. Attempting to print that file isn't going to get them anywhere; it's not going to look good. Unless I have a really odd visitor, my previews aren't even a good size for wallpaper!

What would be a problem is if they, for some reason, put up their own "photo gallery" online with my images. Or maybe used them in a website layout. I'm not sure why someone would bother with that, but if they did and I knew about it, I could take care of it by contacting their host.

A watermark isn't a bad idea, but I'm really not fond of them. The only way for them to be truly effective is for them cover important parts of the photo. This annoys me when I am trying to look at art online. Yes, you make them translucent, but it's like having gauze over my eyes; it interferes with my ability to really *see* the image.

So far as my photographs are concerned, I see it this way: someone grabbing my preview files is only still getting a preview. There'd be no value in trying to sell them.

If I watermarked them, any visitor could still save them. Which is still "downloading illegally". The watermark *will* help discourage any *other* kind of digital use. AND it will remind a compulsive "saver" where the image came from/who it belongs to. Which is the biggest benefit, in my opinion.

I've been giving this a fair amount of thought, because I'm going to add a store to my site to sell my prints in the nearish future.

If my previews were any bigger, I would definitely watermark them. I may watermark in an unobtrusive way for branding purposes. But it would be the kind of thing a determined thief can obscure or cut out. (I have the notion that a really determined thief will always find a way.)

[abba]

Thank you so much-both chaos and absolethe.