[STOCKPHOTO] Are your images being stolen?

[chumpyrules]

I am writing this on behalf and at the request of several
photographers who contribute to Acclaim Images. For a time I had
taken myself out of this and off of this list but at their request,
joined again. They have several issues regarding Acclaim and some of
its past and current practices and feel I am in a position to give
them the answers they need.

Many have attempted to ask Fred questions regarding these issues and
as anyone knows who attempts to ask Fred a question or worse,
question his decisions, are met with rude, abusive and retaliatory
behavior. He often becomes so angry at them for questioning him that
he closes their account and changes their password. For this reason
they have come to me for some possible answers and have personally
asked me to post some of this as they feel other contributors and
potential contributors need to be aware of some of these issues and
their handling of them. They have asked me to address this on the
forum as they do not want retaliation.

Before I address the issue of stolen images that I have been asked to
address, I will be upfront here and state that have not ever hid the
fact that I feel very angry at how Jamie and I were treated by him
regarding events that happened that were less than positive and
unethical. When you combine this with the many cries for help and
questions from his contributors who feel they have no one else to
turn to, is may seem to some as me "trying to get back at him."
Treating others including his contributors, honestly and fairly is
the issue here and not whether I am angry at Fred……I am and I fully
admit it and I am sure no one will be surprised by this admission. I
had someone mention that Fred has remained silent on these issues. I
do not blame him, if I behaved this way to employees and
contributors, I would keep quiet too.

With this said I am going to address an issue that came as a complete
shock to some photographers this weekend and that is the extreme
volume of free comp images flying out the door of Acclaim. I was
asked about comps and how many were downloaded daily. I directed them
to the Acclaim admin page where they log in and told then to scroll
down to where they can view all of the downloaded comps. As I was on
the line it became apparent they the photographer admin page was a
lot different and had a much narrower view than what I was able to
view as staff when I worked there. I was not aware that the
photographers were given such limited information regarding their
images until this was pointed out.

When I explained exactly how many free images were going out the door
constantly the photographers I spoke with were absolutely stunned.
They asked me to post this in hopes that the other contributors will
also know what is happening and ask Fred to discontinue this practice.

First I would like to note that Fred recently in the past couple of
months finally came up with a program to actually see what was
downloaded and had me direct a wonderful member of my sales staff
(former sales staff) to work on a system to try and develop these
downloads into leads. The problem really is the absolute sheer
massive volume of these downloads and this alone makes it impossible
to follow up. Just before I left I was in the process of sending
collection letters to the biggest offenders for copyright
infringement but I am no longer there and I am not sure of the steps
now being taken.
Some photographers are having over 200 plus comp downloads per month
and the last time I looked at the numbers the total comps downloaded
over not too long a time period was over 25,000 or more. TWENTY FIVE
THOUSAND!

First I would like to specify that a comp should be simply an image
used for the purpose of layout or design to see if an image will work
for a particular project. Unfortunately, comps at Acclaim are simply
perceived as complimentary to the customer. These are smaller comps
but suitable for websites, brochures, stationary, business cards etc.

There are two ways to download free comps at Acclaim. One is to right
click on the image which will bring you to a page to register with
your information to receive a comp. You can enter factual or bogus
information to receive a comp it doesn't matter. You do though have
to have an email that is not Hotmail or Yahoo. You can download as
many as you want and there were some customers who had downloaded
over 200 in a day or so.

When they register there is a use section and while most do not note
their use, some do. Some of the uses noted are: personal use,
personal website, company website, stationary, business cards, church
bulletins, company brochures, My Space, tattoo design, and many other
uses.

The second way to receive a free comp image is to set up a lightbox.
If you set up a lightbox with images and look under each image you
will see options. One of these options is "download comp" When you
select this option you will see a nice approx 5x7 comp with a very
small and faint water mark at the top left hand corner which can be
cropped easily. You do not have to register to receive these large
comps and there is no limit to the amount you can download.

I had asked Fred in the past to perhaps have these unlimited comps be
just available to verified account customers and I know that he was
thinking about this in the possible future but nothing concrete has
happened regarding this.

I know many of you are concerned with such issues as internet
security of your photos at Acclaim or other agencies you are
contributing with. Unfortunately at Acclaim, the shoplifting of your
images is running rampant because as far as free comps go, no one is
minding the store and trying to chase the crooks down while they are
running away with your work, is impossible because of the volume
involved.

With this comp process continuing the photographer has no idea where
his or her images are and who and what they are being used for. If
there is an image that has been given as a free comp dozens and
dozens of times and the photographer has a request for an exclusive
buy out of that image, it will be virtually impossible to track down
the image and will make the image unavailable for that buy out.

I would suggest that you check with any agencies you are listed with
and see how they handle this security issue with your images. If you
are with Acclaim I would suggest you ask Fred to pull up the record
of each and every image of yours that has been downloads as a comp.
He has not only the capabilities to do this but can tell you how
many, which images, and any information the customer gave for this
theft so you can follow up on your property and get a handle on where
your hard work is going. I would then suggest unless you don't mind
giving images away for free, that you demand he stop allow this of
your work so you can make a living licensing them properly and
controlling the usage.

Fred states over and over that this is HIS business and HE is running
it and will make the decisions. That may be but the photographers
should be treated with more dignity as contributors and partners who
are partially responsible for his success. Unfortunately IMO, he
treats them the same way he treats their intellectual property, with
a complete lack of respect and accountability.

Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other
questions regarding this process.

Cindy Voetsch

[Tech]

Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other questions
regarding this process.

Gee, there's a novel concept... wish it had started earlier in the
thread........
Cheers
Jeff Boucher

[Cindy Voetsch]

Hi Jeff,

Perhaps I am being dense here but since this thread just started I am not sure what you are getting at. Some of the photographers felt that more of the contributors of this site and others, needed this information and sending a separate email to 500 or more of them was a bit daunting. They felt also that since many of them read this forum, they would get the information. I was contacted not only because I could verify the information but also because many of them did not feel they were in a position to comment publicly.

My offer still stands though, you or anyone can contact me off list if they feel the subject matter is something of a private nature. Or, anyone can simply delete this or not read the thread and move on to the next.....choice is a marvelous thing.

Have a happy holiday!

Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other questions
regarding this process.

Gee, there's a novel concept... wish it had started earlier in the
thread........
Cheers
Jeff Boucher





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Allen Russell]

Cindy

What ever your personal reasons are for sticking it to Fred, and you
are getting him pretty good, I am interested in hearing what you have
to say. I, like many other photographers have heard much about
Acclaim on this and other forums (mainly from Fred) and have
considered them for representation. I consider it one of the major
advantages of the on-line world to have access to information,
whatever its underlying motives may be.

I was previously ask to contribute to Acclaim and seriously
considered doing so. I ask for a copy of the contract and was told a
new one was being drawn up and would be sent to me within the week.
That was several months ago and several attempts by me were met with
polite put offs. I have now been told there isn't a contract.

Anyway, I appreciate the information, juicy as it may be. I wish I
could find out as much about a number of other distributors.

Allen Russell

Post by Cindy Voetsch
Hi Jeff,
Perhaps I am being dense here but since this thread just started
I am not sure what you are getting at. Some of the photographers
felt that more of the contributors of this site and others, needed
this information and sending a separate email to 500 or more of
them was a bit daunting. They felt also that since many of them
read this forum, they would get the information. I was contacted
not only because I could verify the information but also because
many of them did not feel they were in a position to comment publicly.
My offer still stands though, you or anyone can contact me off
list if they feel the subject matter is something of a private
nature. Or, anyone can simply delete this or not read the thread
and move on to the next.....choice is a marvelous thing.
Have a happy holiday!

Post by chumpyrules
Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other
questions
regarding this process.

Gee, there's a novel concept... wish it had started earlier in the
thread........
Cheers
Jeff Boucher
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Cindy Voetsch]

Hi Allen,

In a nutshell:

Fred was dishonest with Jamie and I and in retaliation, he let us go and refused to give us our final pay of benefits he had promised. He has also made me his HR manager and there was a legal issue with an employee he did not agree with. The labor board would not help is with a wage dispute if it involved family members. He then announced to photographers, family and on his own forum, inaccurate information about us and the reason for the lay off.

We received over a hundred emails from Acclaim contributors wanting to know what had happened as they all have frequently been abused verbally by Fred and punished for asking him questions. I then went on the forums and let my side be heard as it was easier to state than in individual emails.

Unfortunately though, Fred's business practices have been appalling and since the photographers have been able to not get straight sane answers from him (you would have to know to believe it) they have come to me for these answers. I got involved on the forums because they can't for fear of retaliation and again, you would have to know Fred to believe this.

I actually took myself off the forum in attempt to back out but again, was contacted by several contributors with questions regarding their payments, ranking, and now comps because again, Fred either refuses to answers questions or retaliates.

When I mentioned to them that they could log in and check the comps we realized their admin page was very narrow and did not include what I was able to access while I was there. There have been over 30,000 now, virtually unmarked comps downloaded since August, RF and RM. These can be uprezzed to be used at 1/2 page if need and someone had Photoshop. An employee told me that the photographers were not supposed to know.

Needless to say the photographers were outraged and asked me once again, to go onto the forum and let people know so that perhaps the Acclaim contributors will read it and help change this. Keep in mind, he DOES retaliate when he is questioned often pulling images, changing passwords, or ranking images lower. It's a fact and all of who have worked with him know this. That is why I am out publicly because there is nothing more he can do to me.

I have had many replies and a good many of the photographers are asking to have their images removed. Some are considering a more drastic action depending of what Fred intends to do.

There's the nutshell. I know I probably come off as a vindictive bitch and I am OK with that because I have promised them I would stay in there till things change for the better or they leave. I back up everything I have said and have correspondence to prove it.

I personally would not trust Fred with my work as he does not think of the photographers as partners but deckhands.....this is though your choice. He is a very moody and volatile individual and working with him is difficult but again, this may be your choice not mine.

Please feel free to call me if you like, some of this would be easier to explain in person rather than email. My number is 541-899-1090 I am not as nutty and vindictive as I sound in the posts. :-)

Cindy


Allen Russell <***@allenrussell.com> wrote:
Cindy

What ever your personal reasons are for sticking it to Fred, and you
are getting him pretty good, I am interested in hearing what you have
to say. I, like many other photographers have heard much about
Acclaim on this and other forums (mainly from Fred) and have
considered them for representation. I consider it one of the major
advantages of the on-line world to have access to information,
whatever its underlying motives may be.

I was previously ask to contribute to Acclaim and seriously
considered doing so. I ask for a copy of the contract and was told a
new one was being drawn up and would be sent to me within the week.
That was several months ago and several attempts by me were met with
polite put offs. I have now been told there isn't a contract.

Anyway, I appreciate the information, juicy as it may be. I wish I
could find out as much about a number of other distributors.

Allen Russell

Post by Cindy Voetsch
Hi Jeff,
Perhaps I am being dense here but since this thread just started
I am not sure what you are getting at. Some of the photographers
felt that more of the contributors of this site and others, needed
this information and sending a separate email to 500 or more of
them was a bit daunting. They felt also that since many of them
read this forum, they would get the information. I was contacted
not only because I could verify the information but also because
many of them did not feel they were in a position to comment publicly.
My offer still stands though, you or anyone can contact me off
list if they feel the subject matter is something of a private
nature. Or, anyone can simply delete this or not read the thread
and move on to the next.....choice is a marvelous thing.
Have a happy holiday!

Post by chumpyrules
Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other
questions
regarding this process.

Gee, there's a novel concept... wish it had started earlier in the
thread........
Cheers
Jeff Boucher
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Cindy Voetsch]

I forgot to add that there really will be no contract. He had the photographers add things and help with it somewhat, one of the things in it was to address not putting the ads on the site. He decided to do that because it brings money to him personally by adding ads. Because he decided to do that he also decided to NOT give them the contract and hinder his plans. I am not sure if you have seen the ads, they are for competitors like istock etc. You may want to check them out. They appear with each image.

Cindy

Allen Russell <***@allenrussell.com> wrote:
Cindy

What ever your personal reasons are for sticking it to Fred, and you
are getting him pretty good, I am interested in hearing what you have
to say. I, like many other photographers have heard much about
Acclaim on this and other forums (mainly from Fred) and have
considered them for representation. I consider it one of the major
advantages of the on-line world to have access to information,
whatever its underlying motives may be.

I was previously ask to contribute to Acclaim and seriously
considered doing so. I ask for a copy of the contract and was told a
new one was being drawn up and would be sent to me within the week.
That was several months ago and several attempts by me were met with
polite put offs. I have now been told there isn't a contract.

Anyway, I appreciate the information, juicy as it may be. I wish I
could find out as much about a number of other distributors.

Allen Russell

Post by Cindy Voetsch
Hi Jeff,
Perhaps I am being dense here but since this thread just started
I am not sure what you are getting at. Some of the photographers
felt that more of the contributors of this site and others, needed
this information and sending a separate email to 500 or more of
them was a bit daunting. They felt also that since many of them
read this forum, they would get the information. I was contacted
not only because I could verify the information but also because
many of them did not feel they were in a position to comment publicly.
My offer still stands though, you or anyone can contact me off
list if they feel the subject matter is something of a private
nature. Or, anyone can simply delete this or not read the thread
and move on to the next.....choice is a marvelous thing.
Have a happy holiday!

Post by chumpyrules
Please feel free to contact me off list if you have any other
questions
regarding this process.

Gee, there's a novel concept... wish it had started earlier in the
thread........
Cheers
Jeff Boucher
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Singh, Shangara]

Post by chumpyrules
First I would like to specify that a comp should be simply an image
used for the purpose of layout or design to see if an image will work
for a particular project.

Yet another nail in the coffin! There is NO need for anyone to
download a comp of an image to see if an image will work in a
project. There is something called imagination that is needed and was
used before downloading comps, i.e., giving away photographer's
images, came into being.

A LOW quality comp with a watermark will help some clients but that
is all that should be provided. I have worked as an assistant
designer and as a designer for a brief period for my sins, so know
something about layout.

A high quality comp will come in handy if trying to sell an ad
campaign. However, ad agencies tend to have money sloshing about and
SHOULD be able to afford a comp. If the comp sells their campaign,
then they can pay for the licence. Remember, everyone in the agency
gets paid, regardless of the success of a tender but the photographer
ONLY gets paid if his/her image is chosen. Why should their image be
used without due payment? Try walking into a shop and taking away a
washing machine to see if it fits into the design of your kitchen and
see how far you get.

Shangara Singh.

Author & Photographer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
Hacking Photoshop CS2 http://www.shangarasingh.co.uk
Stock Photography http://www.mpxstockimages.co.uk
Examaids for Adobe-Macromedia http://www.examaids.com

[Jorge Parra]

Post by chumpyrules
I know many of you are concerned with such issues as internet
security of your photos at Acclaim or other agencies you are
contributing with. Unfortunately at Acclaim, the shoplifting of your
images is running rampant because as far as free comps go, no one is
minding the store and trying to chase the crooks down while they are
running away with your work, is impossible because of the volume
involved.

Nice!!

Post by chumpyrules
With this comp process continuing the photographer has no idea where
his or her images are and who and what they are being used for. If
there is an image that has been given as a free comp dozens and
dozens of times and the photographer has a request for an exclusive
buy out of that image, it will be virtually impossible to track down
the image and will make the image unavailable for that buy out.

Cool!!

Post by chumpyrules
If you
are with Acclaim I would suggest you ask Fred to pull up the record
of each and every image of yours that has been downloads as a comp.
He has not only the capabilities to do this but can tell you how
many, which images, and any information the customer gave for this
theft so you can follow up on your property and get a handle on where
your hard work is going. I would then suggest unless you don't mind
giving images away for free, that you demand he stop allow this of
your work so you can make a living licensing them properly and
controlling the usage.

Yeah Right! I guess he would run to set the record straight immediately upon being asked.

Post by chumpyrules
Fred states over and over that this is HIS business and HE is running
it and will make the decisions. That may be but the photographers
should be treated with more dignity as contributors and partners who
are partially responsible for his success. Unfortunately IMO, he
treats them the same way he treats their intellectual property, with
a complete lack of respect and accountability.

THis information should be taken to media and published and made public. This is
outrageous in every sense and hits on the reputation of serious struggling small agencies
for many time to come.

The Royalty Free Business is like the Pyramid Schemes: it has worked wonders for those at
the top,followed by some that get some small pieces of the cake and the rest, at the base,
get the leftovers. The big ones like Getty actually make money not only for them but for
their shooters and it is easy to meet photogs who claim that they make more money on
their rather small collection of RF files in Getty than they get from their relatively large
collection of RM files.

But they are the top of the pyramid. Those who entered late get much less and the fight to
get profitable is harder. Hence the variations, like microstock and subscription services as
alternative business models for RF.

Now, What I don't get here is what is the benefit of unlimited "donating" images for
comping with no compensation at all, while deteriorating the control on the usage of the
files, rendering them almost public domain. Who benefits here??

What a weird world .

Jorge Parra

[chumpyrules]

Some of us did a search for Acclaim comp use and it was amazing how
many images were being used out there on blogs, websites, and My
Space. Literally too much to even count or deal with. We copied down
some links and sent them to the rightful owner of the image, the
photographer. It was really amazing though how much these images were
being used even many internationally.

Post by Jorge Parra
THis information should be taken to media and published and made public. This is
outrageous in every sense and hits on the reputation of serious struggling small agencies
for many time to come.

Outrageous is one word for it. I have had many photographers very
stunned that this was not something they knew about and that these
comps were so large and because of how small the watermark is and the
placement, just beg for the taking. I was surprised that they didn't
know about most of this. RM images have been and still are,
especially compromised.

Post by Jorge Parra
Now, What I don't get here is what is the benefit of

unlimited "donating" images for

Post by Jorge Parra
comping with no compensation at all, while deteriorating the

control on the usage of the

Post by Jorge Parra
files, rendering them almost public domain. Who benefits here??

Because of the ads now on the site, Acclaim, or Fred, makes a lot of
money by the traffic whether the visitor licences an image or not. He
makes money as soon as they arrive and if they purchase, it just
makes him more money. The mission here has changed and the quantity
of traffic is now whats important not the quality. It's the
contributors images and text that drive the traffic to the site but
then they can either click on an ad for a microstock site or download
a large comp for free......if the photographer loses a
sale.....Acclaim still makes money on the visit.

Cindy

[David Osborne]

I was quite concerned by this - at first...

So for comparison's sake... if you do a Save Image-As (without a
login) from Alamy and Getty you get jpegs of the following sizes:-

450x310 pixels from the Alamy site
640x400 pixels from GettyImages

and then there's 640x400 pixels from an Acclaim comp. The same as is
available from Getty & Alamy

That's enough to print at 2" x 1" or display on screen at 9" x 6".

I can't get too upset by images going out at that size (any bigger
then I wouldn't be happy). I see it as just part of marketing on the
web - anyone who has got images on a website is effectively allowing
their low res images to be downloaded (even if just by screen capture).

David Osborne
http://www.davidosbornephotography.co.uk/

Post by chumpyrules
The second way to receive a free comp image is to set up a lightbox.
If you set up a lightbox with images and look under each image you
will see options. One of these options is "download comp" When you
select this option you will see a nice approx 5x7 comp with a very
small and faint water mark at the top left hand corner which can be
cropped easily. You do not have to register to receive these large
comps and there is no limit to the amount you can download.

[John Fowler]

Post by David Osborne
I can't get too upset by images going out at that size (any bigger
then I wouldn't be happy). I see it as just part of marketing on the
web - anyone who has got images on a website is effectively allowing
their low res images to be downloaded (even if just by screen

capture).

You may be more upset, David, when you walk into your local hardware
store and notice a sexy full colour brochure for some high tech company
using several of your best images, nicely printed. Without payment.
Believe me. Been there, done that.

They were images "too small to be used" according to the "agency" who'd
put them out on a subscription basis - permission to do so was very
surrepticiously buried in the contract's extra-fine print.

[Cindy Voetsch]

I would like to point out that first, Acclaim offers two types of comps, the comp where you right click and register and receive a comp of which 30,000 have been downloaded since the end of August when they started actually tracking them and the comps from the lightbox. There is no way to track comps taken from the lightbox.

The comps from the lightbox (unless Fred went in and changed the programming since yesterday) do not have to be registered for. They are large approx 1.08 MB and can easily be used for some print and web use. You can add 5,000 images to a lightbox and take as many of these comps as you want. There is NO distinction between RM or RF, everything is fair game. If you have an RM image of children or other RM images of a potential sensitive nature on this or perhaps other sites, you have no idea where these are or how they are being used.

Also keep in mind that Acclaim relies on Google traffic and ads, even competitor ads for additional revenue whether an image is licensed or not. Most of the traffic on Acclaim is the casual buyer and lots of personal or small business's and very little traffic with professionals who know what they are doing and what copyright laws are.

There are literally thousands and thousands of images stolen from Acclaim on websites, blogs, and My Space. I have seen them. This does not address all of the card, brochures and other smaller print out there. Any RM image you have at Acclaim or on another site that allows for this type of large virtually unmarked free comp, should really not be considered RM because at this point you have no way to remotely manage that image, it might as well be on a microstock sight where you would at least be paid $1.00 for it.

Perhaps any agencies who offer comps that are of this quality and access ability need to rethink their policy for this and let the photographers know exactly where their images are because as agencies, they should be held liable for them if they are allowing customers to pick them up and walk them out the door.

Cindy Voetsch

Post by David Osborne
I can't get too upset by images going out at that size (any bigger
then I wouldn't be happy). I see it as just part of marketing on the
web - anyone who has got images on a website is effectively allowing
their low res images to be downloaded (even if just by screen

capture).

You may be more upset, David, when you walk into your local hardware
store and notice a sexy full colour brochure for some high tech company
using several of your best images, nicely printed. Without payment.
Believe me. Been there, done that.

They were images "too small to be used" according to the "agency" who'd
put them out on a subscription basis - permission to do so was very
surrepticiously buried in the contract's extra-fine print.





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[David Barr]

Post by Cindy Voetsch
Also keep in mind that Acclaim relies on Google traffic and ads,
even competitor ads for additional revenue whether an image is
licensed or not. Most of the traffic on Acclaim is the casual buyer
and lots of personal or small business's and very little traffic
with professionals who know what they are doing and what copyright
laws are.
There are literally thousands and thousands of images stolen from
Acclaim on websites, blogs, and My Space. I have seen them. This
does not address all of the card, brochures and other smaller print
out there. Any RM image you have at Acclaim or on another site that
allows for this type of large virtually unmarked free comp, should
really not be considered RM because at this point you have no way to
remotely manage that image, it might as well be on a microstock
sight where you would at least be paid $1.00 for it.
Perhaps any agencies who offer comps that are of this quality and
access ability need to rethink their policy for this and let the
photographers know exactly where their images are because as
agencies, they should be held liable for them if they are allowing
customers to pick them up and walk them out the door.
Cindy Voetsch

Strange we didn't hear any of this information from you before you
left Acclaim. Cindy this is vendetta stuff lets get back at
Acclaim! One of the rules of posting on groups is no personal
attacks. This seems to me to have much more to do with Fred than it
has to do with someone downloading images.

Nothing you put on a site is completely safe but neither is any
picture you have printed in a book or ad that can always be scanned.

David Barr

[Mike Shipman/Blue Planet Photography]

I agree. I've stopped reading this thread since it isn't going anywhere but
bitchy. I respect and thank Cindy for her opinion and willingness to help
inform others. I was considering submitting to Acclaim until she contacted
me directly. I appreciated it and will not be submitting anything to Acclaim
until the situation changes. But she had us at "I got laid off because..."

I believe we've gotten the picture and future discussions of this nature
should be off list.

Mike Shipman


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Cindy Voetsch]

Hi David,

Fred had just recently started with the Google ads before I left and at the time, I had not received the email from contributors who felt impacted by this decision. As far as the comps go. I was not aware until last weekend that the admin page the photographers saw was different than the admin page I saw while working there. I thought the comp downloads were common knowledge to them. I also assumed until told differently when contacted, that they knew about the lightbox comps. Apparently they had no reason to set up a lightbox and did not realize it was available there. The lightbox comps is a fairly new feature developed in the last couple of months so most were not aware it existed. I also did not deal with the photographers as much as Jamie did so I was not made aware of some facts till after I left the company. I eventually did oppose him on a sensitive HR issue and the following Monday I was "laid off". Speaking up around Fred often has surprising and volitile
consequences for employees as well as contributors.

Remember too that while employed by Fred and having him sign my paychecks I was not in a position to go on a forum and let others know of any business practices or treatment of others I disagreed with. Just as the photographers generally know what happens when they disagree with him. That is one major reason I am on this forum speaking out. What you call a vendetta many others are thenking me for and have now had the information to address Fred and perhaps resolve these issues.

To address what you said, this has does have to do with Fred and his business ethics, his treatment of others, and something I was asked to do by others.

I hope from this that Fred realizes he cannot continue to run his business like a dictator and keep employees or contributors. I also hope that soon I will not need to post anything or keep addressing this. I can simply ignore the replies but often they are incorrect and I feel I need to address it. Hopefully someday the contributors who contact me privately will feel they are in a position to speak openly and I can go back to my life.

Feel free to contact me off list if you feel I have not addressed your questions. Hopefully I have addressed them completely.

Cindy

Post by Cindy Voetsch
Also keep in mind that Acclaim relies on Google traffic and ads,
even competitor ads for additional revenue whether an image is
licensed or not. Most of the traffic on Acclaim is the casual buyer
and lots of personal or small business's and very little traffic
with professionals who know what they are doing and what copyright
laws are.
There are literally thousands and thousands of images stolen from
Acclaim on websites, blogs, and My Space. I have seen them. This
does not address all of the card, brochures and other smaller print
out there. Any RM image you have at Acclaim or on another site that
allows for this type of large virtually unmarked free comp, should
really not be considered RM because at this point you have no way to
remotely manage that image, it might as well be on a microstock
sight where you would at least be paid $1.00 for it.
Perhaps any agencies who offer comps that are of this quality and
access ability need to rethink their policy for this and let the
photographers know exactly where their images are because as
agencies, they should be held liable for them if they are allowing
customers to pick them up and walk them out the door.
Cindy Voetsch

Strange we didn't hear any of this information from you before you
left Acclaim. Cindy this is vendetta stuff lets get back at
Acclaim! One of the rules of posting on groups is no personal
attacks. This seems to me to have much more to do with Fred than it
has to do with someone downloading images.

Nothing you put on a site is completely safe but neither is any
picture you have printed in a book or ad that can always be scanned.

David Barr
--
Photobar Agricultural Stock Photography
Simplify your Search http://www.photobar.com

If you ate today thank a farmer!




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Shaughn Clements]

I also discovered that the file info is intact on the Acclaim images.

Shaughn

Post by David Osborne
I was quite concerned by this - at first...
So for comparison's sake... if you do a Save Image-As (without a
login) from Alamy and Getty you get jpegs of the following sizes:-
450x310 pixels from the Alamy site
640x400 pixels from GettyImages
and then there's 640x400 pixels from an Acclaim comp. The same as is
available from Getty & Alamy
That's enough to print at 2" x 1" or display on screen at 9" x 6".
I can't get too upset by images going out at that size (any bigger
then I wouldn't be happy). I see it as just part of marketing on the
web - anyone who has got images on a website is effectively allowing
their low res images to be downloaded (even if just by screen

capture).

Post by David Osborne
David Osborne
http://www.davidosbornephotography.co.uk/

Post by chumpyrules
The second way to receive a free comp image is to set up a

lightbox.

Post by David Osborne

Post by chumpyrules
If you set up a lightbox with images and look under each image you
will see options. One of these options is "download comp" When you
select this option you will see a nice approx 5x7 comp with a very
small and faint water mark at the top left hand corner which can be
cropped easily. You do not have to register to receive these

large

Post by David Osborne

Post by chumpyrules
comps and there is no limit to the amount you can download.

[Fred]

Post by David Osborne
I was quite concerned by this - at first...
So for comparison's sake... if you do a Save Image-As (without a
login) from Alamy and Getty you get jpegs of the following sizes:-
450x310 pixels from the Alamy site
640x400 pixels from GettyImages
and then there's 640x400 pixels from an Acclaim comp. The same as is
available from Getty & Alamy
That's enough to print at 2" x 1" or display on screen at 9" x 6".
I can't get too upset by images going out at that size (any bigger
then I wouldn't be happy). I see it as just part of marketing on the
web - anyone who has got images on a website is effectively allowing
their low res images to be downloaded (even if just by screen

capture).

Post by David Osborne
David Osborne
http://www.davidosbornephotography.co.uk/

Not only that but in every case with Acclaim we at least have made an
attempt to get an email, contact information and intended use. We
then follow up on them after a month, in fact, we are putting the
finishing touches on the entire system as we speak and it's quite
nice and I don't think anyone does anything like it.

A question: I have come to the conclusion that our comps are too big
with too small of a watermark so we will be making it smaller and/or
making the mark more obvious. But, we are also thinking about
requiring a small payment, a deposit, if you will, in order to get a
640 x 480 sized unmarked comp. The quality would be a bit lower than
you'd get with a high res and it would be limited by our existing
comp license, which is only good for 30 days and for traditional comp
use. My question is: how much to charge? Doe sanyone have any
experience with charging for comps? Doe sanyone else do this? I like
the idea of this mainly because we will be able to verify the comp
user with a credit card.

BTW, there's been a lot of misleading info posted here by someone who
is very angry at me. If you want to see what we really do with comps
go to any page on the site, such as
http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_pages/0100-0608-2217-3903.html
and click the image or the 'get comp' link. We hardly give these
away. You're presented with links to the comp license at every step
and it is a very concise and clear license. Read it at
http://www.acclaimimages.com/comp_license.txt

The lightbox does have some holes in it but it still requires an
email address to get the comps. We will be fixing this up forthwith.

We're really excited about this system and I know that even Cindy
must have full confidence in it as it is being headed up by her step-
daughter and the programming was done by her other step-daughter's
boyfriend. I won't mention names but will let them chime in on this
project if they wish.

Last but not least I would like to publically extend an olive branch
to Cindy. Cindy worked very hard for me and became more involved in
my business than I asked or felt comfortable with. She now is having
a hard time letting go as she did with her previous employer. I also
ask that each of you take her words in context and understand that
there are a lot of emotions behind them.

Fred Voetsch
Acclaim Images
http://www.acclaimimages.com/

[Marco Secchi]

Few are the reasons why I decided to leave Acclaim and wrote earlier
to Fred asking to remove all my images...

- Absence of a Contract...I think is mostly unfair towards the
Photographers and very unprofessional...if something happen my
Solicitor will laugh at me...if I ask for assistance!

- Adverts... I do not like the idea of having adverts next to my
images. As somebody earlier said I wanted to work with an Agency not
with a Publisher that is making money every day with my images and
using my work. The fact that most of the adverts are istock and
similar is ludicrous.

- Freebies I think what we have been told by Fred, does not really
match the reality and the numbers of downloads is unreal and files are
far too big again is making more money from the ads than from the sale
of images...who cares about free download... you want to create traffic!

Most of anything I do not like to waste time and I had the impression
that I was going nowhere! I must add that I likd working with Alamy
..did not deal very often with Cindy but mainly with Jamie and found
her always very helpful, friendly and courteous!

KR

marco

Post by David Osborne
I was quite concerned by this - at first...
So for comparison's sake... if you do a Save Image-As (without a
login) from Alamy and Getty you get jpegs of the following sizes:-
450x310 pixels from the Alamy site
640x400 pixels from GettyImages
and then there's 640x400 pixels from an Acclaim comp. The same as is
available from Getty & Alamy

[Fred]

--- In ***@yahoogroups.com, "chumpyrules" <***@...>
wrote:
When they register there is a use section and while most do not note
their use, some do. Some of the uses noted are: personal use,
personal website, company website, stationary, business cards, church
bulletins, company brochures, My Space, tattoo design, and many other
uses.
<<<

Thanks for noting our wonderful features, Cindy. What other site asks
for such information? All of those uses are legitimate as long as
they are willing to pay. Our system allows follow up and we do so.
BTW, the person who handles that system is excellent at it. Maranda,
take a bow.

Cindy also wrote:
The second way to receive a free comp image is to set up a lightbox.
If you set up a lightbox with images and look under each image you
will see options. One of these options is "download comp" When you
select this option you will see a nice approx 5x7 comp with a very
small and faint water mark at the top left hand corner which can be
cropped easily. You do not have to register to receive these large
comps and there is no limit to the amount you can download.
<<<

Simply not true.

In every case a comp is only provided to a user who has registered
with an email address. Try it. Cindy is wrong.

Go to Getty Images and you can get unmarked comps by registering and
watermarked comps without registering. We only provide unmarked comps
to people we consider legitimate buyers. There is no way to get them
without registering. We have to send the links out ourselves.

Corbis also offers large watermarked images without registering and
you are not presented with a compp license and their can be no way to
track them (like we do) since you don't have to be logged in.

...yes, Adobe stock photo also offers unmarked comps...

Cindy, can we take a look at your site and see how you do it? Please
post the url here.

Or perhaps you can tell us where you will be working next and we can
check out their system? I'm always open to better ideas but now that
I take a renewed look at our system of tracking every comp download
and asking for usage and contact info, well, it looks pretty damn
impressive.

So the only thing you're left with is that we have too much traffic
and too many comps get downloaded...hmmmm....I think that those
dozens of photographers I send checks to every month like that
traffic. After all, comps lead to sales.

Fred Voetsch - Owner
Acclaim Images
http://www.acclaimimages.com/

[Cindy Voetsch]

You're absolutely right, Maranda does a wonderful job trying to track these. She is definately an asset and deserves a pat on the back for her efforts.

As far as the comps from the lightbox goes, unless you changed it from an hour ago, what I stated is EXACTLY the way it happens as you have no doubt found out by the many outraged contributors who have contacted you and looked for themselves. There is no tracking the comps from the lightbox.

There are some wonderful features and images on your site and a huge amount of great photographers who contribute to your success. Giving virtually unmarked comps away whether it is your site or others, simply devalues the images as they ends up virtually everywhere for free. Perhaps more photographers need to look at how others besides you also manage their images. Also, the feature of advertising for competitors does no one any good but you. That is a less than positive feature for your contributors don't you think? You do have a lot of traffic and I am sure with your ads you have financial gain from that.

I am not going to be working for a stock agency nor do I have a site to give you a URL to go to. I am sure you know that. If I did though, I would certainly treat my contributors and others with more respect and consideration and realize that they are the ones who helped me succeed.

I would be more than happy to discuss this with you off list so feel free to send me a line. It would be great hearing from you.

Have a terrific Christmas and New Year!

Cindy


Fred <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- In ***@yahoogroups.com, "chumpyrules" <***@...>
wrote:
When they register there is a use section and while most do not note
their use, some do. Some of the uses noted are: personal use,
personal website, company website, stationary, business cards, church
bulletins, company brochures, My Space, tattoo design, and many other
uses.
<<<

Thanks for noting our wonderful features, Cindy. What other site asks
for such information? All of those uses are legitimate as long as
they are willing to pay. Our system allows follow up and we do so.
BTW, the person who handles that system is excellent at it. Maranda,
take a bow.

Cindy also wrote:
The second way to receive a free comp image is to set up a lightbox.
If you set up a lightbox with images and look under each image you
will see options. One of these options is "download comp" When you
select this option you will see a nice approx 5x7 comp with a very
small and faint water mark at the top left hand corner which can be
cropped easily. You do not have to register to receive these large
comps and there is no limit to the amount you can download.
<<<

Simply not true.

In every case a comp is only provided to a user who has registered
with an email address. Try it. Cindy is wrong.

Go to Getty Images and you can get unmarked comps by registering and
watermarked comps without registering. We only provide unmarked comps
to people we consider legitimate buyers. There is no way to get them
without registering. We have to send the links out ourselves.

Corbis also offers large watermarked images without registering and
you are not presented with a compp license and their can be no way to
track them (like we do) since you don't have to be logged in.

...yes, Adobe stock photo also offers unmarked comps...

Cindy, can we take a look at your site and see how you do it? Please
post the url here.

Or perhaps you can tell us where you will be working next and we can
check out their system? I'm always open to better ideas but now that
I take a renewed look at our system of tracking every comp download
and asking for usage and contact info, well, it looks pretty damn
impressive.

So the only thing you're left with is that we have too much traffic
and too many comps get downloaded...hmmmm....I think that those
dozens of photographers I send checks to every month like that
traffic. After all, comps lead to sales.

Fred Voetsch - Owner
Acclaim Images
http://www.acclaimimages.com/





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[David Riecks]

Post by Fred
Corbis also offers large watermarked images without registering and
you are not presented with a compp license and their can be no way to
track them (like we do) since you don't have to be logged in.

Fred:

Though last I checked, all Corbis images (on the web and ones you get
for downloads) do have metadata embedded within them.

Does Acclaim send out unwatermarked comp files with embedded metadata (IPTC)?

Given the likelihood of the proposed Orphan Works legislation being
passed next year (or some other form of copyright modernization),
putting files out without watermarks or some form of embedded
metadata is not a good idea even if you think you know who is
downloading the files.

David

--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
***@riecks.com http://www.riecks.com/
Midwest/Chicago ASMP

[Chuck Goodenough]

Gang,
1) Can anyone with the file in their control change metadata info anyway?

2) Re: Searching for files out there on the web:
Who maintains the original file name? Isn't that the only way to
search for your files?

Chuck

Post by David Riecks
Does Acclaim send out unwatermarked comp files with embedded metadata (IPTC)?
Given the likelihood of the proposed Orphan Works legislation being
passed next year (or some other form of copyright modernization),
putting files out without watermarks or some form of embedded
metadata is not a good idea even if you think you know who is
downloading the files.
David
--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
Midwest/Chicago ASMP

--
Chuck Goodenough Photo in Los Angeles:
http://www.chuckgoodenough.com
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
-
Mix Studio: http://www.MixStudioStore.com
Blue Dot Clothing: http://www.BlueDotStore.com
Dust Bunnies Baby: http://www.DustBunniesStore.com
Rocky Trail Outfitters: http://www.RockyTrail.com
Fax [phone] Phone - 213-624-1616

[Elizabeth Conant]

Good question, Chuck,

I was wondering how one would search for pirated images. I can search by name, but what is the chance that someone stealing images is going to use the photographer's name when they use them?

Beth


----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Goodenough
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: [STOCKPHOTO] Re: Are your images being stolen?


Gang,
1) Can anyone with the file in their control change metadata info anyway?

2) Re: Searching for files out there on the web:
Who maintains the original file name? Isn't that the only way to
search for your files?

Chuck

Post by David Riecks
Does Acclaim send out unwatermarked comp files with embedded metadata (IPTC)?
Given the likelihood of the proposed Orphan Works legislation being
passed next year (or some other form of copyright modernization),
putting files out without watermarks or some form of embedded
metadata is not a good idea even if you think you know who is
downloading the files.
David
--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
Midwest/Chicago ASMP

--
Chuck Goodenough Photo in Los Angeles:
http://www.chuckgoodenough.com
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
-
Mix Studio: http://www.MixStudioStore.com
Blue Dot Clothing: http://www.BlueDotStore.com
Dust Bunnies Baby: http://www.DustBunniesStore.com
Rocky Trail Outfitters: http://www.RockyTrail.com
Fax [phone] Phone - 213-624-1616





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[dietmar_scholtz]

Sorry,

but it really drives me crazy...

I received with some verbal pressure the list of the comp downloads
from my account today. HORRIBLE!

This line for example is a good sample:

6539 beth ***@aol.com y 60920114518
0314-0605-2108-5446 myspace NULL

[dietmar_scholtz]

Hi out there ;)

I delivered pictures to ACCLAIM until i have heard from Cindy about
this mess they do yesterday. I checked and rechecked what Cindy said.
First i felt she might be angry because of loosing her job and wants to
harm ACCLAIM now, well, you`ll never know :o)

So i checked again and sorry, what she told and tells is true. Fred
from ACCLAIM told me in a E-Mail i sended him regarding this stuff that
i have to accept tat or leave ACCLAIM. He also didn`t provide the IP-
Numbers of the folks that used what i call now "The ACCLAIM FREE GIVE-
AWAY SERVICE" so i could be able to track MY pictures.

I am really sorry, but i can NOT sell RM pictures anywhere if i do not
have the complete control and, also important, if i can not trust the
firm that sells for me.

Greetings

Dietmar Scholtz / Germany

[Fred]

--- In ***@yahoogroups.com, Cindy Voetsch <***@...>
wrote:
As far as the comps from the lightbox goes, unless you changed it
from an hour
ago, what I stated is EXACTLY the way it happens as you have no doubt
found out
by the many outraged contributors who have contacted you and looked
for
themselves. There is no tracking the comps from the lightbox.
<<<


That's wrong.

Unless you have registered your lightbox with an email address the
download comps link leads you to the same page where you have to
enter contact info and get the comp link via email.

Cindy you have a cookie set and you are already registered so you get
the comp without being asked to register again. So do the following:

1. Clear your cookies by selecting Tools --> Internet Options -->
Delete Cookies...

2. Go to any image page on the site, such as
http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_pages/0487-0612-1813-4740.html
and add the image to the ligthbox.

3. If the lightbox window isn't open go to it and click
the "Download Comp" link.

4. Say "Voila!" as you enter your contact info...no free comp
here!...though comps traditionally are free for the right use.

A few other things: our comps have the site name and image number in
the filename to make them easy to track; Comps are an excellent
marketing tool, which is why every major stock photography site uses
them; Marketing is what an agency does; Our comp license is very
tight, as you can see at http://www.acclaimimages.com/comp_license.txt

But I do appreciate the focus on our comps system. It comes at the
perfect time when we are finishing it up and you and others here have
exposed some flaws which we will correct.

Thanks to all for your input and have a Merry Christmas!

Fred Voetsch
Acclaim Stock Photography
http://www.acclaimimages.com/

[dietmar_scholtz]

Sorry Fred,

but what you are telling here is simply rubbish.

Giving a costumer the opportunity to download small and low
resolution images for layouting is something really different to what
you did with your system. I think everybody who had a closer look at
this and who also had a closer look at where the images are hanging
out at the momemt. It is (or was, i do not know what had been changed
today...) a fact that there is no need to register in any way to get
my hands on the pictures. Arguing doesn`t help in this case, sorry.

Next thing why i left ACCLAIM is that you get the pictures on a non-
exclusive base as we all know. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to market RM
images, which i need in case of a buy-out or something the total
control about in the way you do it with your "comp system"....

Ok, you can tell me that this whole stuff will be changed in future
and so on, no big deal... But what will still be there is the really
strange way you treat your photographers. Sorry Fred, no pictures
means no sales and no sales means no business for you, a simply fact
you in my opinion didn`t understand. I do not neet it to be treated
like an asshole (sorry, this is your way of wording). I do not need
to be treated like a silly little boy from someone in the United
States who seems to think about himself as Mr. I-Am-The-One-And-Only-
In-Stock-Business.
It is as you always told your photographers in your funny mails: Love
what you do or move your but out. So i decided to move my but out
quick, in Germany we call that "Schadensbegrenzung".

Have a pleasant time and all the best
Dietmar Scholtz / Germany

[natur_fotografie]

He is totally right - I also pulled out.

I see him now as a publsiher which want to use our Images and text for free. he is making
more money now with our images with the Ads - but he sure don't share it!

I hope other photographers will follow and don't let him get away with this.

We spent weeks uploading and capturing, we may even start a court case - I see all this as
fraud - our lawyer too!

If somebody wants to join.... let us know!
R

Post by dietmar_scholtz
Sorry Fred,
but what you are telling here is simply rubbish.
Giving a costumer the opportunity to download small and low
resolution images for layouting is something really different to what
you did with your system. I think everybody who had a closer look at
this and who also had a closer look at where the images are hanging
out at the momemt. It is (or was, i do not know what had been changed
today...) a fact that there is no need to register in any way to get
my hands on the pictures. Arguing doesn`t help in this case, sorry.
Next thing why i left ACCLAIM is that you get the pictures on a non-
exclusive base as we all know. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to market RM
images, which i need in case of a buy-out or something the total
control about in the way you do it with your "comp system"....
Ok, you can tell me that this whole stuff will be changed in future
and so on, no big deal... But what will still be there is the really
strange way you treat your photographers. Sorry Fred, no pictures
means no sales and no sales means no business for you, a simply fact
you in my opinion didn`t understand. I do not neet it to be treated
like an asshole (sorry, this is your way of wording). I do not need
to be treated like a silly little boy from someone in the United
States who seems to think about himself as Mr. I-Am-The-One-And-Only-
In-Stock-Business.
It is as you always told your photographers in your funny mails: Love
what you do or move your but out. So i decided to move my but out
quick, in Germany we call that "Schadensbegrenzung".
Have a pleasant time and all the best
Dietmar Scholtz / Germany

[Ian Murray]

Post by natur_fotografie
I hope other photographers will follow and don't let him get away with this.
We spent weeks uploading and capturing, we may even start a court case - I see all this as
fraud - our lawyer too!
If somebody wants to join.... let us know!
R

I received an email from somebody yesterday saying that they were owed
a lot of money by Fred. But because it is the season of goodwill I've
decided not to post about it.

Happy Xmas to all,

Ian Murray

[Elizabeth Conant]

Then there's also the issue of unpaid Account images. I have several dating back to February of 2006 that are still pending. Fred says he's looking into this(claims that some of them might have been comps), but I'm wondering how many other people are effected by this? Despite protestations that he always pays on time and always will; he doesn't talk about Account images and when those will be paid!!

Who would I contact about the legal activity which you reference, R? I might be interested in joining any group looking into legal recourse.

Regards,
Beth

----- Original Message -----
From: natur_fotografie
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 4:11 PM
Subject: [STOCKPHOTO] Re: Are your images being stolen? NO, they are being marketed.


He is totally right - I also pulled out.

I see him now as a publsiher which want to use our Images and text for free. he is making
more money now with our images with the Ads - but he sure don't share it!

I hope other photographers will follow and don't let him get away with this.

We spent weeks uploading and capturing, we may even start a court case - I see all this as
fraud - our lawyer too!

If somebody wants to join.... let us know!
R

Post by dietmar_scholtz
Sorry Fred,
but what you are telling here is simply rubbish.
Giving a costumer the opportunity to download small and low
resolution images for layouting is something really different to what
you did with your system. I think everybody who had a closer look at
this and who also had a closer look at where the images are hanging
out at the momemt. It is (or was, i do not know what had been changed
today...) a fact that there is no need to register in any way to get
my hands on the pictures. Arguing doesn`t help in this case, sorry.
Next thing why i left ACCLAIM is that you get the pictures on a non-
exclusive base as we all know. It is simply IMPOSSIBLE to market RM
images, which i need in case of a buy-out or something the total
control about in the way you do it with your "comp system"....
Ok, you can tell me that this whole stuff will be changed in future
and so on, no big deal... But what will still be there is the really
strange way you treat your photographers. Sorry Fred, no pictures
means no sales and no sales means no business for you, a simply fact
you in my opinion didn`t understand. I do not neet it to be treated
like an asshole (sorry, this is your way of wording). I do not need
to be treated like a silly little boy from someone in the United
States who seems to think about himself as Mr. I-Am-The-One-And-Only-
In-Stock-Business.
It is as you always told your photographers in your funny mails: Love
what you do or move your but out. So i decided to move my but out
quick, in Germany we call that "Schadensbegrenzung".
Have a pleasant time and all the best
Dietmar Scholtz / Germany

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[dietmar_scholtz]

Post by natur_fotografie
If somebody wants to join.... let us know!
R

Think i want to :o)

What i think should be done is billing him on a normal case for every
image view on his advertising publication :o) But it will be hard to
get to the server statistiks...

[natur_fotografie]

Post by dietmar_scholtz

Post by natur_fotografie
If somebody wants to join.... let us know!
R

Think i want to :o)
What i think should be done is billing him on a normal case for every
image view on his advertising publication :o) But it will be hard to
get to the server statistiks...

just go to alexa.com and see roughly - better than nothing. The other way is to go to goole
direct and tell them that acclaim is using the images for publishing now, which is and was
not stated in any contracts.....

[David Riecks]

Post by Chuck Goodenough
Gang,
1) Can anyone with the file in their control change metadata info

anyway?

Chuck:

Yes, and they can change the filename of the image, as well as remove
any visible watermarks. Ok, do you feel vulnerable now?

As far as protecting your images from becoming orphans, here's the
current methods of which I've aware, and their vulnerabilities:

1. Filename:
Unique filenames can be searched if the user doesn't change them.
However, it's very simple to make this change, so, as a sole means of
protection this is inadequate.

2. Embedding copyright (owner) information in the image metadata:
There are several "buckets" into which you can place your copyright
(owner) metadata: Legacy IPTC (pre photoshop 7), IPTC Core (XMP style
metadata) and EXIF (limited to one annotation field and typically
needs to be done "in camera"). As you rightly noted, however, people
can either open the file and the "File Info" to modify these metadata
fields (which would be intentional infringement), or they can
intentionally or inadvertantly "strip" the metadata by re-saving the
file with a number of applications (including Photoshops "Save for
Web", or Photoshop Web Gallery features).

This is an issue of grave concern to all photographers. If you are
interested in learning more about this topic, I suggest you read
the "Metadata Manifesto" which can be downloaded from the
http://metadatamanifesto.blogspot.com/ site.

3. There are two types of watermarks that can be used with images:
visible and invisible (steganographic).

Visible watermarks can be applied at full opacity, or "ghosted" so
that you can still see the image behind the watermark. While these are
an excellent way to discourage use, it is quite possible in many cases
to remove the watermark if the perpetrator has some skills at
retouching or cloning. This would, however, prove that their
infringement was intentional.

Invisible watermarks, such as those offered by Digimarc and Signum,
use low level variations in the underlying pixels to hide information
such as a user ID within the image itself. This is refered to
as "steganograpy" (the art and science of writing hidden messages).
While useful in theory, these hidden messages can be destroyed or
obfuscated to such a point that they are useless. In addition you have
to typically subscribe to a service to find infringments and they will
then have to scour the web searching for images that have your
invisible watermark.

DigiMarc invisible digital watermarking
http://www.Digimarc.com/

Signum Digital Watermarking Technologies
http://www.signumtech.com/

4. Digital Fingerprinting is one of the newest methods of protecting
your images from misuse. A number of firms scour the internet, as well
as printed publications for infringements and compare the images found
to those in their "fingerprint" database. The great advantage is that
these services can find your image even after it's been cropped,
flipped, or modified, and you don't have to do anything to the image
before making it available. However the costs of such services may be
considered by many individual photographers to be outside of their
means as you will be subject to a monthly or annual fee.

Picscout
http://www.picscout.com/

Idee's Espion monitoring service
http://www.ideeinc.com/espion-ems.php

BayTSP digital image tracking
http://www.baytsp.com/

Post by Chuck Goodenough
Who maintains the original file name? Isn't that the only way to
search for your files?

Up until now, no one maintained the original file name except for you.
However there is an option which will soon be arriving on the scene.
This is "The Artist & License Registry" that is being administered by
PLUS (http://www.useplus.org/).

It's not currently active, but should be in the near future.

Hope that helps.

David
--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
http://www.riecks.com , Chicago Midwest ASMP member
http://zillionbucks.com "The Webhost for your Creative Business"
Chair, SAA Imaging Technology Standards committee
Version 2 of the Controlled Vocabulary Keyword Catalog is out
http://controlledvocabulary.com/imagedatabases/cvkc_order.html

[Jim Hargan]

As usual, an extremely helpful and clear summary. Thanks, David!

It *should* be enough protection to place your images at a low pixel
count (say, 350 to 400 pixels on the long axis), then jpeg it down to 40
or so. Alas, some thieves have preposterously low standards, and will
steal images that pros consider unusable.

However, it strikes me that the methods I know of obscuring
steganographic markings will degrade these submarginal images even
further, perhaps making them unusable even to those with low standards
-- or at least making the resulting product unprofitable. Wishful
thinking? Does anyone have any experience with such methods?


Jim Hargan

Post by Chuck Goodenough

Post by Chuck Goodenough
Gang,
1) Can anyone with the file in their control change metadata info

anyway?
Yes, and they can change the filename of the image, as well as remove
any visible watermarks. Ok, do you feel vulnerable now?
As far as protecting your images from becoming orphans, here's the
Unique filenames can be searched if the user doesn't change them.
However, it's very simple to make this change, so, as a sole means of
protection this is inadequate.
There are several "buckets" into which you can place your copyright
(owner) metadata: Legacy IPTC (pre photoshop 7), IPTC Core (XMP style
metadata) and EXIF (limited to one annotation field and typically
needs to be done "in camera"). As you rightly noted, however, people
can either open the file and the "File Info" to modify these metadata
fields (which would be intentional infringement), or they can
intentionally or inadvertantly "strip" the metadata by re-saving the
file with a number of applications (including Photoshops "Save for
Web", or Photoshop Web Gallery features).
This is an issue of grave concern to all photographers. If you are
interested in learning more about this topic, I suggest you read
the "Metadata Manifesto" which can be downloaded from the
http://metadatamanifesto.blogspot.com/
<http://metadatamanifesto.blogspot.com/> site.
visible and invisible (steganographic).
Visible watermarks can be applied at full opacity, or "ghosted" so
that you can still see the image behind the watermark. While these are
an excellent way to discourage use, it is quite possible in many cases
to remove the watermark if the perpetrator has some skills at
retouching or cloning. This would, however, prove that their
infringement was intentional.
Invisible watermarks, such as those offered by Digimarc and Signum,
use low level variations in the underlying pixels to hide information
such as a user ID within the image itself. This is refered to
as "steganograpy" (the art and science of writing hidden messages).
While useful in theory, these hidden messages can be destroyed or
obfuscated to such a point that they are useless. In addition you have
to typically subscribe to a service to find infringments and they will
then have to scour the web searching for images that have your
invisible watermark.
DigiMarc invisible digital watermarking
http://www.Digimarc.com/ <http://www.Digimarc.com/>
Signum Digital Watermarking Technologies
http://www.signumtech.com/ <http://www.signumtech.com/>
4. Digital Fingerprinting is one of the newest methods of protecting
your images from misuse. A number of firms scour the internet, as well
as printed publications for infringements and compare the images found
to those in their "fingerprint" database. The great advantage is that
these services can find your image even after it's been cropped,
flipped, or modified, and you don't have to do anything to the image
before making it available. However the costs of such services may be
considered by many individual photographers to be outside of their
means as you will be subject to a monthly or annual fee.
Picscout
http://www.picscout.com/ <http://www.picscout.com/>
Idee's Espion monitoring service
http://www.ideeinc.com/espion-ems.php
<http://www.ideeinc.com/espion-ems.php>
BayTSP digital image tracking
http://www.baytsp.com/ <http://www.baytsp.com/>

Post by Chuck Goodenough
Who maintains the original file name? Isn't that the only way to
search for your files?

Up until now, no one maintained the original file name except for you.
However there is an option which will soon be arriving on the scene.
This is "The Artist & License Registry" that is being administered by
PLUS (http://www.useplus.org/ <http://www.useplus.org/>).
It's not currently active, but should be in the near future.
Hope that helps.
David
--
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
http://www.riecks.com <http://www.riecks.com> , Chicago Midwest ASMP member
http://zillionbucks.com <http://zillionbucks.com> "The Webhost for your
Creative Business"
Chair, SAA Imaging Technology Standards committee
Version 2 of the Controlled Vocabulary Keyword Catalog is out
http://controlledvocabulary.com/imagedatabases/cvkc_order.html
<http://controlledvocabulary.com/imagedatabases/cvkc_order.html>