Are You On Flickr? Your Images Are Up 4 Sale

[Joe Mondello]

How Every Flickr Photo Ended Up on Sale This Weekend

http://www.jmg-galleries.com/blog/2008/07/07/how-every-flickr-photo-ended-up-on-sale-this-weekend/

I found this VERY troubling. :eek:

[back alley]

i think there was a discussion about this before.

[sam_m]

interesting.

[nikonhswebmaster]

If you are worried about your photos being used as wallpaper or screen-savers you should not use Flickr. I personally could care less.

There are so many other ways to show your work if social networking sites like Flickr are not your style.

[jan normandale]

Joe, I have exceptionally low res and small images at Flickr. I treat it as a "community hang out" it lets me interact with others while not providing all my images at a 'useable' level of resolution or size. I'm sure someone will try and steal but my strategy is to have everyone else's images more desirable than mine. Sort of like having a 'beater' bike in an urban environment. That way the single speed bikes are stolen first!

[swoop]

I don't like flickr. I think the site has an ugly interface. I do use DeviantArt. I think the layout is a bit better. And I resize my images to 800x600 at 80dpi. So they aren't very printable. I am concerned about my images being stolen. DA has an option to not allow downloads of your image. But there are ways around that.

I just use the site to point people to who want to view my work. I keep it more updated than I do my own personal website. And it's a place where I can post the "crappy but interesting" photos.

[paulfitz76]

I tend to agree with the "let people see them" for the low res, and I think if you post photos on a social networking site, given their "approach", it's like pouring water into the ocean and trying to claim it back as yours.

Isn't it kind of the idea of social networking sites that everything there belongs to everyone?

Maybe I don't understand them. It's a generational thing I guess. I really don't care for them, then again my RFF is one anyway.
I don't care for Flickr because the images are too small to see any detail with.

[kxl]

While, as noted in the article, this is an egregious example, it is by no means unique to Flickr. I used to have a smugmug account, and occasionally would find my images used elsewhere. I didn't exactly lose sleep over it, but when I finally decided to build my own website (for other reasons), I made a conscious decision to use Flash to mitigate links or downloads.

[M. Valdemar]

So don't post your photos on Flickr.

How anyone who publicly posts photos imagines that they have any control of them henceforth is delusional.

[charjohncarter]

Well, I agree with you. I will register my concern with Flickr, even though I don't think anyone would want my photos (but who knows). I didn't think anyone could start my '62 Jaguar but me. That didn't keep it from being stolen. What is an API?

All these people that say don't post on Flickr are posting elsewhere including RFF. Aren't they being naive about their chances of being sold out?

[charjohncarter]

As you will perceive from my API question I'm not that WWW competent. How would one register a complaint with Flickr?

[M. Valdemar]

I could care less if any photo I post online anywhere is "stolen" or used on the front page of a magazine, for that matter.

If I'm going to sell my work, I invoice with a thumbnail and get paid for it first before I deliver a large printable file. I don't post things I would not want used gratis. There is no way to control what happens once you put something online.

Most of this is nonsense. Big deal if someone uses some crummy Flickr photo for a silly cell phone wallpaper, or anything else. You're not all Rembrants.

[Bill58]

I use flickr for backup, image storage and to be able to copy/paste images to messages where a URL is necessary. If somebody copies my images, that fine w/ me--it's just a hobby.

[maggieo]

If someone wants to use the stuff I've posted on Flickr, fine. That's why I've got a Creative Commons license on them.

I'm happy that people see my work and find value in it. I used to draw a salary for making photos, and now I do it for love.

(and people would have to wade through a bunch of personal stuff to find anything worth stealing, so I ain't worried)

[sam_m]

If you read the whole article, you'd have seen that the flickr API is allowing people access to full res. images, even if the photog specified them not to be accessible. Many people use flickr as online storage and to link to on places like rff, like Bill58 describes. Within flickr you can set your images to only be viewed at the default size, and not have the little link above that says "All Sizes" available. This has given people a sense of security which clearly was false, as these images are in fact accessible, not just thumbnails or 500 pixel wide samples, but the original full res upload.

[Joe Brugger]

which is why my uploads are usually 600x900. plenty for the site and once in a while someone asks for, and gets, a larger one.
if you're trying to make money from your photos, don't post anything big to Flicker. it was launched for sharing images, not as a commercial trade show.

[M. Valdemar]

On the other hand:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9985516-7.html?hhTest

[nikonhswebmaster]

So don't post your photos on Flickr.

How anyone who publicly posts photos imagines that they have any control of them henceforth is delusional.

Yep, I figure if my photo shows up in the New York Times I will eventually get paid, and if it shows up on some kid's cell phone I probably won't get paid.

I could care less.