# not many photos on here !!!



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

Nearly 200,000 members.
846 photo albums on here according to the records.

Thats about 30 pixels per member !   .
C'mon folks...get some more put on, don't be afraid .


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 19, 2015)

I don't host my images here as I post them on other forums as well.  I host my images at one site and link to them from all the forums I post on.


----------



## sscarmack (Jun 19, 2015)

Same^^^


----------



## BillM (Jun 19, 2015)

I'd guess 99% host elsewhere and link to


----------



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

Just seems strange so few people can be bothered to put them on here thats all.
Maybe its just me.


----------



## waday (Jun 19, 2015)

errol said:


> Just seems strange so few people can be bothered to put them on here thats all.
> Maybe its just me.


Well, it's wasted time and space. If you can host in one place to share in multiple, why spend the time to host in multiple places to share in multiple places? Doesn't make sense.

I would bet TPF also appreciates members linking to photos rather than hosting them.


----------



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

It only makes sense if you dont have images elsewhere...like me !


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 19, 2015)

errol said:


> Just seems strange so few people can be bothered to put them on here thats all.
> Maybe its just me.



It's not that I can't be bothered.  But why host an image in 10 different places when you can host it at one and link to it there?


----------



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

Fair point but not everyone has images scattered all over the web.


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 19, 2015)

That's the point............ to NOT have images scattered all over.


----------



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

Well i definately fit into that category.


----------



## astroNikon (Jun 19, 2015)

If you share your photos to other people too, it doesn't make sense to put it here.  Plus, I think this place has a limit on the quantity.   I have about 4,900 photos on photo site which I use as a central repository.


----------



## errol (Jun 19, 2015)

I understand your point entirely.
But i still dont have any great number of my images anywhere else.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 19, 2015)

errol said:
			
		

> Nearly 200,000 members.
> 846 photo albums on here according to the records.
> 
> Thats about 30 pixels per member !   .
> C'mon folks...get some more put on, don't be afraid .



In my signature, I have a link to a gallery of all of the photos I have recently (2012-2015) directly posted (embedded) here on TPF, which leads to my on-line casual photo storage site at pBase, where there are about 10,000 images available to browse or steal.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 19, 2015)

Tried to care, but failed.  Sorry.


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 19, 2015)

OK. We got this settled.  Now let's all step away from our electronic devices and go shoot something.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 19, 2015)

Read the Terms & Conditions. That's why I rarely or no longer post my photos.


----------



## snerd (Jun 19, 2015)

Buckster said:


> Tried to care, but failed.  Sorry.


How hard did you try?!


----------



## Buckster (Jun 20, 2015)

snerd said:


> Buckster said:
> 
> 
> > Tried to care, but failed.  Sorry.
> ...


Not very, to be honest.

I used to have a LOT of photos posted here, though I host them elsewhere and link, as previously discussed earlier in the thread. 

When I found out that TPF staff are just fine with members who openly state that they violate our copyrights by downloading, printing and putting in coffee table books any of our photos that catches their fancy, I decided that this was not a good place to share them, so I removed them.

The great thing about linking them from my own server is that all I had to do was change the name of the directory they were in on that server, and they all went dark here, without me having to revisit every thread where I'd posted one, and trying to edit it out.

I simply can't bring myself to display my photos in bulk on a photography forum website like TPF, when it's staff has stated plainly to me that they don't respect my copyrights.  But that's just me.

So yeah, I don't really care if TPF has a lot of members' photos on it or not anymore.


----------



## Fred Berg (Jun 20, 2015)

I post my photos directly to TPF as this is the site I visit most often and uploading to threads and creating albums is very easy and user friendly. Regarding the terms, they seem reasonable enough for a free of charge site with the one negative point that members are not able to close and delete their accounts for themselves.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 20, 2015)

I haven't posted any of my photos since 'the change'. I don't know if ownership changed too (I had asked and looked it up when I first started using the site but don't see current info. on site ownership). But I haven't posted any more photos with the current terms ('permanent'... 'unlimited license to use' etc. re: content). To me that potentially allow usage beyond photos being posted here for viewing.

To me it seems appropriate to allow site usage by members for discussions, and for a site to use paid ads to run it as a business. Terms to me should not allow further usage of my work beyond display on the website.


----------



## KmH (Jun 20, 2015)

The ownership of TPF didn't change.
It's still Social

What do have issue with as far as the Terms regarding posting photographs an other content:


> You are granting us with a non-exclusive, permanent, irrevocable, unlimited license to use, publish, or re-publish your Content *in connection with the Service*. You retain copyright over the Content.


----------



## Overread (Jun 20, 2015)

KmH said:


> The ownership of TPF didn't change.
> It's still Social
> 
> What do have issue with as far as the Terms regarding posting photographs an other content:
> ...



As far as I'm aware the "connection with the service" line means that they are allowed to show the photos that you upload to the site on the site and nothing more.


As for Buck's point any photo anywhere on the whole internet can be right clicked/screen captured - printed and stuck in a scrapbook/on the wall of someone's house. We've no way to police such actions; no way to prevent them and quite honestly people have been cutting pictures out of magazines to put into scrap books for decades and thus far the world hasn't ended


----------



## Fred Berg (Jun 21, 2015)

Overread said:


> As far as I'm aware the "connection with the service" line means that they are allowed to show the photos that you upload to the site on the site and nothing more.



This is what I understood it to mean.

No offense meant to anyone but I do sometimes wonder if the P in TPF really stands for paranoid. Perhaps my attitude to the dangers of being exposed the right-click brigade is different to that of other members, though, because I make no commercial use of my images and don't stand to lose out financially if others do. If people are worried about this, they could upload smaller images which couldn't be put to much use by anyone inclined to lift them from the site.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

Overread said:


> As for Buck's point any photo anywhere on the whole internet can be right clicked/screen captured - printed and stuck in a scrapbook/on the wall of someone's house.


And it's an illegal violation of copyright every time.  It's thus never okay.  It cannot be legally OR morally condoned, approved of or ignored when it happens, or it is no better than turning a blind eye when witnessing any other crime, and pretending it didn't happen.



Overread said:


> We've no way to police such actions; no way to prevent them


I would remind you that as a matter of policy, the TPF staff are quick to pounce on any post that includes a photo not shot by whomever posted it or licensed to exhibit in that manner, and edit that post to remove it, with a warning not to do that in the future.  There's a reason for that, and it's called "copyright", and it's very clear what that means to anyone who's informed on the subject.  In short, it means that ONLY the copyright holder has the RIGHT to copy the work, nor do anything else with it, like post it to a forum OR print it and make a photo book with it.

In the first case, you pounce like a cat on a mouse.  In the second, the person who says they're doing something that violates other members' copyrights gets not even a stern glance from the TPF staff.  There's a obvious glaring double-standard.

At the very LEAST, the TPF could warn the person who brags about it not to post about illegal activity.  Instead, the TPF staff's response, "(crickets)".

It's not like it's a foreign concept to the TPF staff to respond that way to merely mentioning illegal activities associated with copyright violations.  As an example, the TPF staff also have another standard response to a related situation, and that's when someone suggests something about being able to get software, like say, Photoshop, without paying for it by using torrent software or something like that.  Saying something like that isn't even a copyright violation in itself, but it's still tainted enough by copyright issues that the TPF staff's standard response is to remove the content and warn the member not to post such things again here.

And rightly so, at least morally and ethically.

At the very LEAST, the TPF staff could warn the person who posts about illegal activities associated with copyright violations.by stealing your members' photos and necessarily violating your members' copyrights in doing so, just as they do as a response to the example with the torrent thing.



Overread said:


> and quite honestly people have been cutting pictures out of magazines to put into scrap books for decades and thus far the world hasn't ended


So, now it is the TPF staff's position that if a crime is easy and everyone's doing it, then it's okay???  Copyrights, ethics and morality be damned, stealing other people's work and doing with it as you please is a-ok enough that the TPF staff just shrugs it's shoulders and looks away when you talk about how you do it???  Hey, "thus far the world hasn't ended."  It's essentially a non-issue to the TPF staff.

Take your cues from that, image-pirates _(wink, wink, nudge, nudge - sincerely, the TPF staff)_.

Well now I have to ask, if it's such a non-issue, why don't you allow anyone around here to post a photo they don't hold the copyright to?  Oh, that's right...  It's that obvious, glaring double-standard again.

Now, I understand that you'll pop out some more excuses, er..., excuse me, reasons, to blow this off again, because that's what always seems to happen in a situation like this, and this situation was already officially decided and done some time ago anyway.  I don't expect you folks to change your mind on it, or anything like that.  We're just having a conversation about why I don't post a lot of photos here, and why I pulled the many I had posted over time.  I gave my reason, you had a counterpoint, and I'm just addressing that.

I accepted that it is what it is here at TPF when it all went down, and it just means that I'd rather not share very many of my photos here anymore since finding out.

That doesn't make it right though.  Whatever excuses you come up with won't make it right.  They won't make it morally or ethically or legally okay to steal other people's photos and do whatever you want with them, just because you can and it's a crime that happens a lot, anymore than it's okay to do it with software.  It's the exact same thing, morally, ethically and legally.

The TPF staff defends software against copyright theft, but won't defend their own members against copyright theft.

It's just that simple.

Qué será, será.


----------



## Overread (Jun 21, 2015)

The "don't embed photos that are not your own" line applies primarily because we are a photography community and as such we use it as a rule to ensure clarity when uses post so that content posted by users is clearly their own works. 

It's a rule we enforce in general but not 100%. For example we allow the embedding of photos in a thread when people are editing anothers work to show the edits; and we have a laxer application of the rule in the off-topic section with regard to some general images in circulation around the net. 

Far as I'm aware copyright is a minefield, but in general images embedded (not hosted) on forums in threads are generally considered fair use or at least I've yet to hear of a forum being legally challenged because their users embedded photos from around the net into their threads (I accept that there is a potential legal challenge there and would note that I'm excluding situations where the person performing the embedding is claiming ownership of the work). It is a grey area of legalities rather like the vast amount of fan-fiction based upon copyright work which technically can also be challenged and removed (however I've again yet to hear of any author having fan-fiction pulled excepting situations where said fiction was being used to generate income -- I have heard of computer games being pulled and mods in some cases where they made use of copyright material, however its a rarer occurrence when the software is freeware)

It's also something we can enforce; we can lock/remove/edit threads and their content. We can't tell people not to save photos they see on the net; we can't tell them not to use them as backgrounds on their computer; we can't tell them not to print them. 


You are correct in that we could take a firmer stance with the policy of discussion on this topic, however as far as I'm aware we've only ever had once instance of this activity occurring on the site (at least I can only recall seeing it mentioned once by one person - I'm sure its been mentioned more than once but likely only in passing and thus not in a place which generated enough attention that I noticed it). As such its never been a major issue (unlike software pirating which is discussed far more often ) for us to even have a general policy of dealing with it.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

I see that my crystal ball is working perfectly.  Much appreciated for confirming it.

Here's a gift in return: Amazon.com photography copyright Books

Enjoy.


----------



## tirediron (Jun 21, 2015)

I would like to add to Overread's post, that simply because you didn't see a response to a given situation, does not mean that there wasn't one (or many).  With only a couple of exceptions, all matters of "discipline" or enforcement on TPF are dealt with by the moderating team through the use of PMs and restricted-access forums so that only the moderating staff and the member(s) in question will be aware of what is going on.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

tirediron said:


> I would like to add to Overread's post, that simply because you didn't see a response to a given situation, does not mean that there wasn't one (or many).  With only a couple of exceptions, all matters of "discipline" or enforcement on TPF are dealt with by the moderating team through the use of PMs and restricted-access forums so that only the moderating staff and the member(s) in question will be aware of what is going on.


In that case, I would like to add that I was explicitly given responses by PM from the staff that ever-so-clearly spelled out EXACTLY the response and zero-level of concern for our copyrights from the staff as I stated above, so your response here is irrelevant to the actual situation in question.

In addition, the TPF staff clearly has no reservations about posting those warnings in public when editing posts to remove photos that the poster doesn't have copyright of, or when posters suggest violating the copyrights associated with software.

Once again, double-standards and attempts at justification that don't actually justify the immoral, unethical and illegal actions being defended by the staff as no big deal are rather unimpressive, IMHO.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

that is why i hardly ever post photos of my dog here. I am afraid someone will steal them and violate my copyright.  And my dog.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

errol said:


> Nearly 200,000 members.
> 846 photo albums on here according to the records.
> 
> Thats about 30 pixels per member !   .
> C'mon folks...get some more put on, don't be afraid .


lot of the members probably don't even come on here anymore. Active members and membership are two different things. 190k of them could have moved on long ago.
Also, seasonal, people are probably out enjoying themselves or busy, working, living life, whatever....
They just may not have a reason to post photos.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

Buckster said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > I would like to add to Overread's post, that simply because you didn't see a response to a given situation, does not mean that there wasn't one (or many).  With only a couple of exceptions, all matters of "discipline" or enforcement on TPF are dealt with by the moderating team through the use of PMs and restricted-access forums so that only the moderating staff and the member(s) in question will be aware of what is going on.
> ...


wow, ain't you on a tangent today. Geez, just don't post photos, or your better photos, or photos you intend to receive proceeds from, or post lower quality files so use is limited. Takes like 300 dpi to print.
How are the meds working out?

)just messing with you( LOL


----------



## tirediron (Jun 21, 2015)

Buckster said:


> ...are rather unimpressive, IMHO.


To which you are fully entitled.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

bribrius said:


> that is why i hardly ever post photos of my dog here. I am afraid someone will steal them and violate my copyright.  And my dog.


No surprise there, given how you feel if someone even dares to take a photo of someplace or something you've taken a photo of, let alone taking the photo you actually shot yourself and doing something with it without your permission.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

bribrius said:


> Geez, just don't post photos, or your better photos, or photos you intend to receive proceeds from, or post lower quality files so use is limited.


See, the problem with that mentality is that copyright exists explicitly to protect artists so that we CAN post our works for others to view, read, listen to in their full glory, without having to worry about losing our rights to be the only ones who can legally do so.

It's like advising those who produce movies to only make and let people see them at a much-reduced size and clarity that makes them so crappy looking and sounding, that nobody would even want to make a copy of them.  Same with music.  If all the music on the radio and CDs and so on were of a quality that is so reduced that nobody would even want to copy it, there's little point to the artist creating it in the first place.  It's like telling a writer to only include every other word in the book and don't include the big surprise ending, so that nobody will want to copy and steal it.

It's like telling someone that if they don't want someone to break in and steal their TV, they should mess up the TV so that the picture is so garbage-looking that nobody would WANT to steal it, or to scratch up their expensive car all to hell and put a few dents in it with a hammer so that nobody would WANT to steal it.

It is, in effect, blaming the victim for dressing their art so nicely that they got raped and saying, "well, you had it coming."

No sir, those are not acceptable solutions.  Dealing head-on with those who would violate our rights and perpetrate crimes against us is the proper response to criminals, not cowering from them, and certainly not by ignoring their activities and crimes against others.



bribrius said:


> How are the meds working out?


All in all, pretty well I'd say, since they're still keeping me alive.

I saw my oncologist on Friday and she's satisfied that I'm likely to live at least another 4 months on my present daily chemo treatments, till the next PET scan in October.  If things start to get out of hand before then, I'll let her know, so that we can plan for the next step on this journey with my incurable blood cancer. 

The neuropathy has now extended from my leg to my foot, so I can't feel anything at all anymore on that limb, but I can still get around, if not for long periods at a time, sitting down to rest it every 10 to 30 minutes, as necessary. 

The increasing muscle aches and horrible, crippling cramping I experience out of the blue from head to toe are probably from the daily chemo, according to her.  She suggested that if it gets too bad, we may have to cut back on the chemo, which I'm opposed to, since I'm kinda keen on continuing to live as long as possible, even if I'm not in the greatest physical condition to fully enjoy it the longer it goes.

The side-effect rash from the chemo has moved to my face again, leaving scars on my arms where it last manifested itself.  It looks bad, but at least it doesn't itch until it bursts and scabs, which are almost all healed now on my arms.

Breathing is getting more difficult with time also, and she said she's going to set me up with a pulmonary specialist to try to help with that.

But it all beats the alternative, which is death, so I'm pretty happy with that latest medical assessment.



bribrius said:


> just messing with you( LOL


Much appreciated.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

Buckster said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > Geez, just don't post photos, or your better photos, or photos you intend to receive proceeds from, or post lower quality files so use is limited.
> ...


such a save the world idealist......nice soap box. Realizing of course you can't fix most of these problems, and don't at least find my suggestions suitable to you, i guess you are taking the measures that you fancy. What "should be" and what "just is" are hardly ever the same thing. To each their own.

and yeah, i never knew anyone with cancer where it turned out well. In the end morphine, hospice, some surgery on the way maybe end up missing a organ or pieces, and did i mention morphine? Lots and lots of morphine. Not a good way to go, think i would rather throw myself in front of a Amtrak.  Suppose with the morphine overload in the end though you probably won't feel a thing on the way out. Still the Amtrak though, if it were me, Save me from the ordeal of the sympathy and making people feel obligated to stand by the bedside too. suppose everything dies some day eh? wth...
Hopefully things get a little better for you.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 21, 2015)

I don't know that it would be possible for any website or mods to be able to completely prevent people viewing a site from taking photos from the site. But Buckster does make some interesting points. (Didn't realize your health situation, hope you continue to improve.)

I would think the intent of the Terms was to enable the site to display users' photos but to me it wouldn't be necessary to allow for unlimited usage, etc.

I did look up the company again which was not exactly a quick easy task and mostly what I could find without having to send a fee etc. to get a copy was who is listed as the registered agent, who is listed as the three company officers; it didn't indicate who actually owns the company that I could find.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

Buckster said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> > Geez, just don't post photos, or your better photos, or photos you intend to receive proceeds from, or post lower quality files so use is limited.
> ...


rethinking this (yeah, i know, another post).  If you believe you will deteriorate to death you could actually make your last photo project this. Document it, lot of selfies, film, commentary. Maybe donate something to the cancer society. Use you knowledge and experience toward a good. Last will and testament kind of project. Just throwing this out there.


----------



## bribrius (Jun 21, 2015)

vintagesnaps said:


> *I don't know that it would be possible for any website or mods to be able to completely prevent people viewing a site from taking photos from the site. *But Buckster does make some interesting points. (Didn't realize your health situation, hope you continue to improve.)
> 
> I would think the intent of the Terms was to enable the site to display users' photos but to me it wouldn't be necessary to allow for unlimited usage, etc.
> 
> I did look up the company again which was not exactly a quick easy task and mostly what I could find without having to send a fee etc. to get a copy was who is listed as the registered agent, who is listed as the three company officers; it didn't indicate who actually owns the company that I could find.


some sites can, never seen it on a forum though. This is a interesting thing to consider.  I wonder if there is a code they could come up with to prevent copy and paste, save as etc. off here. Then just provide a checkbox to activate it on your account just like the "photos not okay to edit", or make it a default setting. Then any right click would just be ineffective and pop up with "you do not have allowable permissions" or something.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

bribrius said:


> such a save the world idealist......nice soap box. Realizing of course you can't fix most of these problems, and don't at least find my suggestions suitable to you, i guess you are taking the measures that you fancy. What "should be" and what "just is" are hardly ever the same thing. To each their own.


To live in even a remote semblance of a civilized society where a person can feel even reasonably secure from criminals, the populace must insist together that they will not tolerate being victims, and that means standing up for each other against becoming victims, not just one's self.

It's why we have laws at all.
It's why we have law enforcement at all.
It's why we have courts and judges at all.
It's why fines are imposed at all.
It's why large judgments are imposed at all.
It's why we have jails at all.
It's why we have prisons at all.
It's why we, as a people, can feel that, while not a perfect system by any means, nor in a perfect world, there IS STILL some sense of justice to be had when crimes are committed against us IF we persist and pursue justice.

Obviously, there will always be those who want the benefits without putting in the effort.  They're commonly known as "free riders" because they reap the benefits in rights and laws that protect them, but let others put in the effort to support their continuation and effectiveness.  That's their choice as well, but it seems a rather selfish one to me.



bribrius said:


> and yeah, i never knew anyone with cancer where it turned out well. In the end morphine, hospice, some surgery on the way maybe end up missing a organ or pieces, and did i mention morphine? Lots and lots of morphine. Not a good way to go, think i would rather throw myself in front of a Amtrak.  Suppose with the morphine overload in the end though you probably won't feel a thing on the way out. Still the Amtrak though, if it were me, Save me from the ordeal of the sympathy and making people feel obligated to stand by the bedside too. suppose everything dies some day eh? wth...
> Hopefully things get a little better for you.


I'm already way past my due date anyway.  When I first got sick and was diagnosed, it was October, I was in stage 4, and nobody thought I'd make it to Christmas.  That was a LOT of chemos, a lot of transfusions, a lot of hospital beds for long stays, like a month at a time in bed feeling like death warmed over, a few surgeries, a lot of other drugs, giving myself shots a couple times per day, a wheelchair, a therapist to teach me to balance and walk again to get out of the wheelchair, a lot of medical staff, a stem cell transplant, and 14 years ago, so I've got no complaints at all.

Gotta say an emphatic "no" on the morphine though.  They gave it to me once, and I never want it again.  It was like being smothered with a giant pillow to me.  I'll figure it out when the time comes.


----------



## Buckster (Jun 21, 2015)

bribrius said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > *I don't know that it would be possible for any website or mods to be able to completely prevent people viewing a site from taking photos from the site. *But Buckster does make some interesting points. (Didn't realize your health situation, hope you continue to improve.)
> ...


If it can be seen on a screen, it can be copied.  There's no such thing as a software that can prevent it.  They can make it a bit more difficult, but only by a fraction - not enough to matter.

There's really nothing that can be done by TPF to prevent anyone from copying any photos that are seen here.  But that's not the point.  The same is true for people illegally downloading software - they have no possible way to prevent that from happening either.

What they _DO_ have the power to do, and they exhibit it with the illegal software downloads, is rebuke it.  They _COULD_ make it known that it's not acceptable at TPF, just as it's made known that it's not acceptable to illegally post or download software or suggest it at TPF, just like it's not acceptable to post photos you don't hold copyright to at TPF _(minor exceptions to the rule noted)_.

They just choose not to.


----------



## pixmedic (Jun 21, 2015)

In the name of the Holy Admins, I hereby REBUKE thee, oh unholy image downloaders of the forum, and cast thee down amongst the fallen with thine foul demons...and software pirates. Forever banished from the sight of our congregation of law abiding forum goers, lest ye suffer the great smiting of the banhammer.

Glory be to TPF,

Amen.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 21, 2015)

pixmedic said:
			
		

> In the name of the Holy Admins, I hereby REBUKE thee, oh unholy image downloaders of the forum, and cast thee down amongst the fallen with thine foul demons...and software pirates. Forever banished from the sight of our congregation of law abiding forum goers, lest ye suffer the great smiting of the banhammer.
> 
> Glory be to TPF,
> 
> Amen.



How much is it for that engraved on a nice brass and walnut plaque, suitable for wall mounting?


----------



## Buckster (Jun 23, 2015)

Related:

TPF Article Of Interest Link


----------



## BrickHouse (Jun 23, 2015)

TL: DR


----------

