On a recent job at the Tangalooma Wild Dolphin Resort on Moreton Island - just off the coast of Queensland (Australia)- I came a cross a lighting situation that really works so well, I can't understand why everyone doesn't use it.
> On a recent job at the Tangalooma Wild Dolphin Resort on Moreton Island > - just off the coast of Queensland (Australia)- I came a cross a > lighting situation that really works so well, I can't understand why > everyone doesn't use it.
> I've got some bad news, D-Mac. I accidentally touched your butterfly > and I think I've killed it. How'd you do that?
It worked... You were going on about macros and butterflies so I thought I'd use some of mine to bait you. I'll raise you 2 butterflies against your soldier ant!
Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can really do when they get savage.
There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a message about trying to right click or the download killer but not working together - yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the bride from my front page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me what you get.
Eventually it'll be the butterflies and a greeting from me. Right now it is sans the butterflies due to technical difficulties. The bottle is still half full, you see!
>There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to >you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without >your permission.
> There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e- mail it > to you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image > without your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a > message about trying to right click or the download killer but not > working together - yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the > bride from my front page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me > what you get.
Thats cool and effective.
It also kills the keyboard shortcut for image zooming in firefox ( ctrl+/ ), and even screws up image zoom in the menus.
Actually the zoom can help to sell work I would think, especially for old codgers who don't see so well now a days.
>> I've got some bad news, D-Mac. I accidentally touched your butterfly >> and I think I've killed it. How'd you do that?
> It worked... > You were going on about macros and butterflies so I thought I'd use some > of mine to bait you. I'll raise you 2 butterflies against your soldier > ant!
> Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have > found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can > really do when they get savage.
> There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to > you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without > your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a message about > trying to right click or the download killer but not working together - > yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the bride from my front > page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me what you get.
> Eventually it'll be the butterflies and a greeting from me. Right now it > is sans the butterflies due to technical difficulties. The bottle is still > half full, you see!
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:22:45 GMT, D-Mac <n...@the.group> wrote: >Annika1980 wrote: >Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have >found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can >really do when they get savage.
OK I give up...What's supposed to happen??
I've dl'd to photo and so far nothing has happened.
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:22:45 GMT, D-Mac <n...@the.group> wrote:
>> There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to >> you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without >> your permission.
> The only way to prevent somebody from downloading your images would be to > use Flash or something similar (even then, a person who wants that image > can screen capture it).
> After the warning pop-up, Firefox (at least my version) shows the right > click menu like nothing ever happened.
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:22:45 GMT, D-Mac <n...@the.group> wrote:
>>Annika1980 wrote:
>>Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have >>found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can >>really do when they get savage.
> OK I give up...What's supposed to happen??
> I've dl'd to photo and so far nothing has happened.
>>>I've got some bad news, D-Mac. I accidentally touched your butterfly >>>and I think I've killed it. How'd you do that?
>>It worked... >>You were going on about macros and butterflies so I thought I'd use some >>of mine to bait you. I'll raise you 2 butterflies against your soldier >>ant!
>>Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have >>found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can >>really do when they get savage.
>>There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to >>you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without >>your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a message about >>trying to right click or the download killer but not working together - >>yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the bride from my front >>page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me what you get.
>>Eventually it'll be the butterflies and a greeting from me. Right now it >>is sans the butterflies due to technical difficulties. The bottle is still >>half full, you see!
>>On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 04:22:45 GMT, D-Mac <n...@the.group> wrote:
>>>Annika1980 wrote:
>>>Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have >>>found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can >>>really do when they get savage.
>>OK I give up...What's supposed to happen??
>>I've dl'd to photo and so far nothing has happened.
> Did you look at what you downloaded?
I think Colyn might have got the guys with the lights.
> Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have > found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can > really do when they get savage.
Why would I try to download the image? The browser already did that before it showed it to me :P
> There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to > you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without > your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a message > about trying to right click or the download killer but not working > together - yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the bride from > my front page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me what you get.
But its code only to distarct the clueless and casual surfers..
> The only way to prevent somebody from downloading your images would be to > use Flash or something similar (even then, a person who wants that image > can screen capture it).
Flash is not in any way proof from acquiring the image and no screen-shooting is required.
>>Seriously... You didn't try to download the picture or you would have >>found out first hand what a pair of killer butterflies on my site can >>really do when they get savage.
> Why would I try to download the image? The browser already did that > before it showed it to me :P
>>There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to >>you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without >>your permission. So far I've only got the butterflies and a message >>about trying to right click or the download killer but not working >>together - yet. It's getting close. Download the image of the bride from >>my front page: http://www.photosbydouglas.com and tell me what you get.
> But its code only to distarct the clueless and casual surfers..
Fortunately this accounts for 90% of the Internet's casual downloaders. It's absolutely true that nothing will stop a determined thief.
I'm still working on integrating the butterflies and this download fooler so that when you try to copy a picture, you only get the butterflies. I have it working in part but not together. The butterflies are not actually an image as such.
So far I can hide the butterflies from the download or I can fool you into getting something else but I haven't quite got the whole lot working the way I want and when I do, you won't be able to read the html of the page and figure out what I did the way you can now.
When I get it finished it will be encoded so you won't be able to do as Sander and Matt have done and look at the scripting language and figure out how to get the image anyway. The only way to get it when I'm finished will be a screen grab and I have a foil for that too!
I suppose the fact I'm monitoring what people do on the site so I can work with the stuff has not escaped those who simply read the html of the page. But exposing your ideas to the world is the only way you find the flaws in them.
One thing I learnt from last year's troll wars was that preventing theft of images should be the highest priority on any Professional photographers mind when they cobble together a web site. Doing this and still providing clear access to your potential customers is the holy grail I'm striving for.
The login method I'm using on my gallery has prevented smart arsed critics from getting at the proofs and pictures I get paid to take unless the client gives them a password. I thrilled with this. It's part of Gallery itself and I'm still able to give people access to my "public images". www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery if you are interested.
> I'm still working on integrating the butterflies and this download fooler > so that when you try to copy a picture, you only get the butterflies. I > have it working in part but not together. The butterflies are not actually > an image as such.
> So far I can hide the butterflies from the download or I can fool you into > getting something else but I haven't quite got the whole lot working the > way I want and when I do, you won't be able to read the html of the page > and figure out what I did the way you can now.
> When I get it finished it will be encoded so you won't be able to do as > Sander and Matt have done and look at the scripting language and figure > out how to get the image anyway. The only way to get it when I'm finished > will be a screen grab and I have a foil for that too!
> I suppose the fact I'm monitoring what people do on the site so I can work > with the stuff has not escaped those who simply read the html of the page. > But exposing your ideas to the world is the only way you find the flaws in > them.
> One thing I learnt from last year's troll wars was that preventing theft > of images should be the highest priority on any Professional photographers > mind when they cobble together a web site. Doing this and still providing > clear access to your potential customers is the holy grail I'm striving > for.
> The login method I'm using on my gallery has prevented smart arsed critics > from getting at the proofs and pictures I get paid to take unless the > client gives them a password. I thrilled with this. It's part of Gallery > itself and I'm still able to give people access to my "public images". > www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery if you are interested.
Why? The images on my site are small, moderately compressed jpegs. I have the negatives, I know they're mine, and no one's going to do much of anything with those small jpegs...
> Why? The images on my site are small, moderately compressed jpegs. I have > the negatives, I know they're mine, and no one's going to do much of > anything with those small jpegs...
For one thing... Pedophiles are everywhere. I do a fair amount of child photography and hold a Government "blue card" to allow me to work with children. Not long ago some creep hooked one of my child studies and used it in his perverted site to attract people through this innocent enough picture. I won't bore you with the niceties of a Police enquiry and the cost of justifying my innocence. Now, no one gets to see my work but the client and any people authorized by the client. Weddings nearly always have children in them these days too so no one get at them either.
For second... A creep calling himself Ch...@go.com in concert with Tony Polson, pulled a pic of mine I posted in the belief it was topical and of interest to photographers without authority and both posting it back on the 'net with less than complementary comments about it's sharpness. It was sharp and I later posted proof of that but why should I have had to?
These creeps stole my images and then set about using them to post defamatory remarks and comments about me and my photography. This idiot Chrlz, put my pictures on his (now closed virtue of a take down order) web site and proceeded to use them to demonstrate his idea of photography, using my pictures as examples.
Now it comes to pass that everyone who has ever taken a picture and attempted to please all the people all the time with the balance between file size and page viewability, has hit the JPG highlight and soft image thing.
For me, having all my PCs working to make photos on a variety of printers using ICC profiles, none were set for making perfect Internet suitable images so some of the pictures I posted last year had blown highlights and maybe the wrong colour profile for Internet viewing at their best.
I might have over compressed some which led to that soft look. Of course in reality, the original and any photos I printed didn't have blown highlights, weren't out of focus and actually had vibrant colours. Just the ones I posted to the Internet having wide gamut colour profiles instead of sRGB looked unflattering.
Well here we are a year later and with hindsight firmly in place. To prevent a repeat of Bret Douglas, Tony Polson and Chrlz, all saying my pictures are shit (even if they are). They don't now get to see the photo I make a living taking and they soon won't be able to download any of my images to repeat their attempts to amuse themselves at my expense.
That's why I bother Matt. I'm sure Al Denelsbeck is going to love you for asking that one!
> Eventually it'll be the butterflies and a greeting from me. Right now it > is sans the butterflies due to technical difficulties. The bottle is > still half full, you see!
The butterflies are a PITA, and the no-right click thing won't do anything but annoy visitors because you're fiddling with the context menu. Then again, there's the FireFox Web Developers' Toolbar ...
> >> There's 136 lines of code in the thing. If you want it I'll e-mail it to > >> you along with the code to "help" (not) people download an image without > >> your permission.
> > The only way to prevent somebody from downloading your images would be to > > use Flash or something similar (even then, a person who wants that image > > can screen capture it).
> > After the warning pop-up, Firefox (at least my version) shows the right > > click menu like nothing ever happened.
> But save the image and look at it.
I get exactly the same image that's on the screen.
> So far I can hide the butterflies from the download or I can fool you > into getting something else but I haven't quite got the whole lot > working the way I want and when I do, you won't be able to read the html > of the page and figure out what I did the way you can now.
Hmmm. You think?
> When I get it finished it will be encoded so you won't be able to do as > Sander and Matt have done and look at the scripting language and figure > out how to get the image anyway.
That won't work. The scripting you're using to move the butteflies and that damn right-click message will only stop the casual visitor. The JavaScript "encryption" tools usually take a couple of minutes to beat.
Besides, once your images are displayed on my monitor, I already have local copies of them.
While I thoroughly agree with your points about protecting your work, what you're doing will do little to help. Now, you could say that even a little is better than nothing, but it's like pissing in the sea to make it deeper.
|
