Thank you for the fuller explanation.

We all want to be asked, but some of us have accepted that we won't always be. I've been asked a few times, which I appreciated. Once, though, I found a picture of mine being used on Facebook without any credit given. When I asked the page author to credit me, I never heard back. It was just a primary image for a climbing page, so no huge deal, but annoying all the same.

You have a lot of lovely photos; some were mesmerizing to look at. If I were you, I'd listen to the many asking you not to go and continue posting low-res photos; that would be perfectly understandable.

Either way, good luck to you. I'm sure I speak for many in wishing you well.

chugach mtn boy wrote:What do you think about what Josh describes in the o.p., not as a matter of legality but as a matter of good practice?

So then your talking about my "hotlinks"? (photos sourced from SummitPost that link right to the author's original work)

chugach mtn boy wrote:I love that Google thinks this picture is very similar to the one you posted :

You got me good on that one! One of the best posts of the day for sure. I got a good laugh.

Years ago when the web was young on photography sites, a frequent thread subject was dangers of putting image content on the web and various hot linking issues. Those were days when almost any image jpg's were usually rather puny less than 300 pixel width. Since serious printing is at least 200 pixels and more often 300 pixels per inch, that means a puny one inch picture. In other words something fit for a itty bitty business card or coffee mug. At some point I began posting on my own web site smallest images of mostly 720 pixel width with larger images up to about 1000 pixels. Still that is only going to make for a wee 3 to 5 inch usable image. Amusingly that seemed to rattle the status quo. I basically said there was little commercially someone would ever be able to do with such small images. They also argued many users could only display tiny images especially at the dial up baud rates of the day and I said not for long as modems speeds, computers memory, browser power, and microprocessor speed was certain to go way beyond that issue in short order which it has. '

Others whined someone could copy then use the embedded image on another web site without credit. That is true and potentially annoying but without any financial importance to the original owner. If one is motivated, they can inform the hosting provider of a purpetrator but if that purpetrator is a small fish there is nothing that would interest lawyers to pursue legal action. If the purpetrator has lots of assets like successful corps and is in a Western country especially the USA, lawyers will be happy to assist one for even small copywrite image infringements. Thus one ought to expect small web vermin will sometimes illegally use our small web images and not worry about anyone poking them with a stick.

Bob Sihler >>>"The amount of damage that has been done to this site through drama about photos and photo voting is both vast and incalculable."

Well that may be an overly dramatic way of saying it is an unpleasant festering element of the site but I would tend to say it is a minor element haha. I almost never vote on images because the voting system is as I complained about years ago more than once is an unfunctional joke with strongly rated images too often bearing little relation to image quality. But then as some quite correctly have noted, the site is about Climbing NOT photography, thus so what! Regardless I still post a few images downsized to less than 1000 pixel widths here each year in the interest of supporting threads and content. I have noticed a fair number of new digital camera users that (too lazy to edit and downsize?) seem to like dumping in their full sized images of several thousand wide pixel widths. Fine as long as they don't care. As long as there are such larger images posted by non-pros, any professionals have little to worry about if they only post small sizes.

David Senesac
http://www.davidsenesac.com

Josh Lewis wrote:

chugach mtn boy wrote:What do you think about what Josh describes in the o.p., not as a matter of legality but as a matter of good practice?

So then your talking about my "hotlinks"? (photos sourced from SummitPost that link right to the author's original work)

Yes, I was interested in what Bob thought, because he's been a little sensitive on this issue himself at times, I think, and he's got interesting things to say. Look, you do amazing pages, but you might be slightly on the wrong side of a fuzzy line here. In the unlikely event you were ever pulling one of my pictures to be a major feature of YOUR site (not an SP page--your separate site), I'd like being asked, and like I said, most people do seem to ask. On a couple of my SP pages I have non-SP photos with a hot link to the other site, just as you do, but I asked the people. Now, legally I didn't have to, but it seemed a nice gesture. For one thing, it helps them to monitor for misuse (sorry, Josh, but your Google tool is pretty crude still).

I give you lots of credit for raising a good issue--I'm just surprised you seem offended to get a range of responses.

tahoecedar is having a complete breakdown in front of all of us regarding her photos even though absolutely no one has done anything to the photos, Josh included.

I think that about sums up this thread.

chugach mtn boy wrote:
I give you lots of credit for raising a good issue--I'm just surprised you seem offended to get a range of responses.

Sorry for intervening, but maybe Josh was waiting to get his hands on a piece of THIS .......



That's a HIGH-RESOLUTION PHOTO, by the way ....

mrchad9 wrote:tahoecedar is having a complete breakdown in front of all of us regarding her photos even though absolutely no one has done anything to the photos, Josh included.

I think that about sums up this thread.

I intend to avoid the DRAMA on this one, and NOT post a picture of somebody actually having a breakdown ... which would be totally and completely MISUNDERSTOOD ...

Epic fail lcarreau...

CMB, making my job difficult now are we. This goes beyond myself with this you know. This will then arise the question "Should this hot linking business be enforced"? And how so from a administrator perspective?

Your argument won. I'll get removing the thumbnails on my site that are hot linked from SummitPost that were not asked. I guess a lot of PM's are going to be floating around soon. But what does this mean for SummitPost photos on SummitPost pages? If someone attaches a photo to a page of mine, do I need to ask the author for using it on the main page?

Typically I ask folks for photo credits (I've done this many times). Especially for SP pages (photos hosted else where). But I admit I didn't when copying my pages from SP to AA. I figured the fact that it linked to the author was enough. Also when I or my friends post mountain pages on SP we do not ask the image authors who attached their photos if we can use the pics on the main page.

Regarding the Google tool, that's because you looked at the bottom. Most of the results were indeed accurate (pages with the image).

Josh it is hard enough to make a good page, we don't need to add any extra burden.

Personally if I see a photo I like for a page I am doing, then I may use it on the page... have on a few occasions. I don't ask. No time to sit and wait for a response that may never come. If they asked me to take it down I probably would, but I really think something is off with you if you submit a photo to this site and don't want anyone to display it on a page. Heck I have one page that I took over and totally revamped that doesn't even have a single photo of my own on it!

I think this is the standard practice. I've found photos of mine on pages here, just hot inked like we all display photos here. No one asked me, nor should they.

mrchad9 wrote:Josh it is hard enough to make a good page, we don't need to add any extra burden.

Personally if I see a photo I like for a page I am doing, then I may use it on the page... have on a few occasions. I don't ask. No time to sit and wait for a response that may never come. If they asked me to take it down I probably would, but I really think something is off with you if you submit a photo to this site and don't want anyone to display it on a page. Heck I have one page that I took over and totally revamped that doesn't even have a single photo of my own on it!

I think this is the standard practice. I've found photos of mine on pages here, just hot inked like we all display photos here. No one asked me, nor should they.

Of course. Anything we put on Summitpost can be used all around Summitpost--we all do it and it's expected. I'm talking about me taking your pride & joy picture and making it the centerpiece of my own website, "Chugach's amazing exploits.com". Even if I leave it on your server and all, it's ... something I should probably ask permission to do, as a courtesy.

This tahoeceder person is soooooooo much better than all of you snapshot maggots!

"And actually it is too late. I have already deleted all of my trip reports, albums and 2/3 of my photos. It takes a long time so I have not finished yet, but when I get time I will...maybe when I buy a cheap camera I will start posting my snapshots and won't care. I'll have lots of photos of myself holding the camera at arms' length, which seems to be the popular shot these days."

Meh. No sleep will be lost over those deleted TRs.

The poor girl was probably going through a midlife crisis... something most of us will likely experience in various degrees of intensity sooner or later (if we haven't already done so).
I hope she's okay... I did enjoy looking at her photos.

She went homeless for three years to buy camera equipment. She's definitely going through some sort of crisis.