Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Visible Watermark Feature  
User currently offlineAdministrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21427 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
SITE ADMIN

Hello photographers,

A lot of you have expressed concern that your photos uploaded in high quality to Airliners.net can be be used commercially without your permission. Many voices have been raised that a feature should be added where a photographer can choose to include a visible watermark in his photos to deter misuse:
Watermarks....protecting Our Images Against Theft (by AKE0404AR Jun 2 2005 in Aviation Photography)

This feature has now been implemented. My personal opinion is that the loss is often bigger than the gain when it comes to watermarks. Hundreds of thousands of people visit Airliners.net to enjoy the photos and all these have to endure a watermark. While it might prevent theft, misuse is relatively rare. Most companies choose to contact the photographer for permission even if there is no watermark.

I still chose to add this feature as I hope photographers that have not dared to upload to us in the past for fears of misuse will now choose to upload. I therefore hope that the overall effect is positive.

Please note that First Class Members will still have access to the photos without a watermark.

Please have a look at the new feature and let me know what you think:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/add.main

Thanks,
Johan


Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
108 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePipoA380 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1594 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21403 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Johan,

Is there any way we could see an example of how it would look like? And why the privilege of the "no watermark" not for all membrers?

How many photographs would put it on theirs? Of course it's rageing to see our pics being stolen, but looking at pics will maybe no longer be as cool...

Quoting Administrator (Thread starter):
My personal opinion is that the loss is often bigger than the gain when it comes to watermarks.

I totally agree!

Cheers, Philippe

[Edited 2005-08-19 03:10:23]


It's not about AIRBUS. it's not about BOEING. It's all about the beauty of FLYING.
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21381 times:

Johan,

I think this is a good move. I especially like the idea of picking your own spot and strength of the watermark and as well the idea that the photog can decide if he wants to apply it.

Ivan


User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21374 times:

I agree that I'd like to see a sample image first.

I notice that the darkness of the watermark can also be varied.

Can you prepare a sample image with light, medium, strong, very strong watermarks so we get an idea what we're doing.

Also, what happens to all the existing photos in the DB if we decide we want a watermark? Do we have to re-submit and reupload every one of our images?

thanks


User currently offlineQ330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21359 times:

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 3):
Also, what happens to all the existing photos in the DB if we decide we want a watermark? Do we have to re-submit and reupload every one of our images?

I assume that, just like changing the copyright bar when you change your photographer name, you'll have to reupload all your photos.

I'm not really looking forward to seeing watermarks on photos here, but at least it's optional.

-Q



Long live the A330!
User currently offlineAdministrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21352 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
SITE ADMIN

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 3):
I'd like to see a sample image first.

You can test it on any image in the database here:
http://www.airliners.net/static/delme.php

Regards,
Johan



Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
User currently offlineEksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1315 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 21350 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

Johan.

Thank you.


Suresh



World Wide Aerospace Photography
User currently offlinePipoA380 From Switzerland, joined May 2005, 1594 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 21345 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks Johan. Even though it does not make too much difference if it's light, I'd really like to see the possibility to see it without to all members...


It's not about AIRBUS. it's not about BOEING. It's all about the beauty of FLYING.
User currently offlineOlympus69 From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 1737 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 21322 times:

Why could you not have an airliners.net watermark that appears on all photos, but only when the photo is downloaded?

User currently offlineA346Dude From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1287 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 21320 times:

Ugh, disappointed.  

I really hope the majority of photographers decide not to use this "feature". I know I won't.

Thanks for at least making it optional.

A346Dude

[Edited 2005-08-19 03:50:32]


You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5715 posts, RR: 44
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 21311 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

mmm,

Not convinced on this one, I agree with Johan I am not sure the gain is worth it...
I find it incongruous that a site with uncompromising standards on quality, near invisible dustspots, and motiv can support the vandalising of images with blatant watermarks.(and I mean some of the contributors rather than the management)
Sure there are photographers that have had pictures misappropriated, some of those have been compensated afterwards(a sale they would NOT have made). It is likely that many of the photographers here that are vocal about illegal use of their work would not have any sales at all if it were not for the exposure on A.net.
There is also the possibility the sites that really "steal" photos will continue to do so.

It is the high quality of images on A.net that keeps people coming back.. I think if a large percentage of contributors utilise the watermark option many of those will not return.

Having said that... like the comments thing, lets give it a try(although the comments issue does not impact the quality of the db)

Regards

Chris

[Edited 2005-08-19 03:55:28]


If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 21273 times:

Well I've tried it and have this suggestion.

Have the thumbnail state which images are watermarked prior to having to open the image. Then I won't be wasting my time looking at images that are ugly.

thanks


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 21272 times:

Quoting Administrator (Thread starter):
Please note that First Class Members will still have access to the photos without a watermark.

What does paying for a first class membership to get a username and post in the forums have to do with viewing the image without a watermark?

Can we add that same watermark to the original image prior to uploading? So it is on all versions viewed, either by non-members or first class members?

Is there a method to add this to all of our privious photos?

[Edited 2005-08-19 04:42:02]

User currently offlineA346Dude From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1287 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 21258 times:

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 11):
Have the thumbnail state which images are watermarked prior to having to open the image. Then I won't be wasting my time looking at images that are ugly.

Agreed. Is this possible, Johan?



You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 21254 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 13):
Is this possible, Johan?

Dude, read his first post......... Wink Can't get much clearer.

Quoting Administrator (Thread starter):
Please note that First Class Members will still have access to the photos without a watermark.


User currently offlineKnighty From Australia, joined Dec 2004, 207 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 21226 times:

Absolutely 100% against this - I've just tried that sample page and they look horrible!


Ian Knight - Proud Canon shooter!
User currently offlineUnited737522 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 21181 times:

No, this is just another step in the wrong direction for airliners.

Oh boo hoo. Some flight simmer made a banner out of my photo. Oh no, my photo is on a site that provides info about aircraft. All without my permission. Oh the world is going to end!


User currently offlineQ330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 21177 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 12):
What does paying for a first class membership to get a username and post in the forums have to do with viewing the image without a watermark?

I assume it's mostly to create another benefit for first class membership. It's probably pretty safe too, since I wouldn't expect someone who's paying for A.net membership to be stealing photos.

After looking at the samples, I'm not happy with this feature. It really isn't nice to have big watermarks across photos. Even the lightest ones are distracting.

-Q



Long live the A330!
User currently offlineAn-225 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 3950 posts, RR: 40
Reply 18, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 21176 times:

I don't think it's a right step. Images are ruined.

Alex.



Money does not bring you happiness. But it's better to cry in your own private limo than on a cold bus stop.
User currently offlineRotate From Switzerland, joined Feb 2003, 1491 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 21122 times:

I really dont like it, because the watermarks are way too big, they ruin defintely the photo, even in light.
why cant people choose on their own, if they put their "own" small watermark on their shot? then will are also getting rid of that discussion with the 1st class memebership?

get me?

Robin

[Edited 2005-08-19 08:18:00]


ABC
User currently offlineWillo From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 12
Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 21097 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 9):
I really hope the majority of photographers decide not to use this "feature". I know I won't.

Which means you will have to sign up for first class membership  Sad

This move is a success for the vocal minority that use the site to conduct their business. It is a shame that it has been foisted on the rest of us who are pure hobbyists.


User currently offlineGhostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 21083 times:

Yuck! How could any so-called 'photographer' be prepared to showcase his/her work here with watermarks like these splashed across them? Where is the logic in doing that?

As I said on the previous thread, realistically just *how* many photos are stolen? It is a very small proportion indeed and this is a classic case of degrading the high standards of quality for 99% of honest A.Net viewers in order to put off the 1% who are less scupulous.

At least it is optional I suppose...

 ghost 

PS: I have had 2 images 'misused' out of 1099 in the database so I make that an 0.182% dishonesty ratio  Smile



"I chase my dreams but I never seem to arrive"
User currently offlineErwin972 From Netherlands, joined May 2004, 500 posts, RR: 44
Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 21065 times:

Johan, All,

Great function. Glad it is optional. A few people will be happy now. But I choose not to use it.  Smile

I want visitors to enjoy my photography! That's my motivation for uploading in the first place.



Kind regards,
Erwin



My gear: Nikon, Sony, Red, Sachtler etc.
User currently offlineJetTrader From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 586 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 21042 times:

Quoting Willo (Reply 20):
Quoting A346Dude (Reply 9):
I really hope the majority of photographers decide not to use this "feature". I know I won't.

Which means you will have to sign up for first class membership

Not quite sure this is true.

As I interpret it, he is saying that as a photographer he will select the "no watermark" option when he uploads...as will I.

Then our shots will not be watermarked whoever is viewing them.

I think that's right...  Smile

Cheers,
Dean / JT



Life's dangerous. Get a f**king helmet!
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5715 posts, RR: 44
Reply 24, posted (9 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 21031 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Not a huge amount of support for this option!!

A vocal minority have requested it and it happened.
At least it is optional, perhaps an alternative would be to let the minority use their own watermark, with easy to implement guidelines. I accept this would place extra load on the screeners.(a very bad thing!!)

Perhaps another alternative is for the minority that use A.net as a way of running their business to find another way of gaining the free exposure gained via A.nets huge audience. I venture to suggest any alternative method of gaining that exposure will cost significantly more than the few "stolen" images.(and likely still result in "stolen" images)

I accept that it is the photographers and their work that "makes" A.net but I feel some may be biting the hand that feeds them.

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
25 INNflight : I do not understand why all of you guys are so upset about this feature?! The thread Johan linked in the 1st posting explains everything why it was im
26 Willo : My apologies, wrong interpretation of the original post! Having just checked the upload page I see that the watermark option is available to all phot
27 Gary2880 : I've said this before hopefully someone will agree with me this time instead of hiding the photograph usage in the 'about' section where if someone st
28 LHRsunriser : Yuck Yuck Yuck. Well Done in the effort Johan. But we have the option those who want it have it those that dont dont. I wont be having it. Cheers Dom
29 LGW : Gary, "put a clear message between the photograph and the photocomment on the large/medium photographs " "That way everyone knows exactly what they ar
30 A346Dude : That is correct. Sorry for any confusion.
31 A346Dude : Jeff, I have no idea what you're talking about. Johan's original post stated First Class members would still have access to the non-watermarked image
32 Granite : Hi all Words of wisdom from Ben P. Regards Gary
33 Flyfisher1976 : Well maybe the world won't end, but I for one would be extremely aggrevated if any of my photos were used in any way without my permission. I don't w
34 Gary2880 : they will still try and say 'oh sorry I didn't know, I didn't go to that bit' with it buried in the About section with the words legal action staring
35 TS : Disappointing to see this ugly feature implemtented just because a dozen out of several thousands of photographers requested it. I hope any photo with
36 StealthZ : Thomas, An interesting concept... I wonder if some of those that insisted on watermarks would be so happy if they were excluded from searches etc! As
37 Tappan : United737522 calls a plumber to his house and says thanks for fixing my toilet good day. Well, says the plumber:"Do I get paid" no says United737522,
38 Post contains images Pilot kaz : Yick, I wont be using it, Ruins the photo in my opinion, Thanks anyway Johan and thanks for the optional feature
39 Tappan : JOHAN, Can I just flip a switch on a certain photo??...or do I have to re upload?? Thanks Mark Garfinkel
40 Flyfisher1976 : A dozen? Do you mean like a bakers dozen or a regular dozen? Like 12? Out of several thousand? Sorry, but quite an exaggeration....
41 JeffM : This makes me laugh....I would bet less then 1/10th of the folks with photos on here have the financial means to hire a lawyer and try and prove loss
42 Flyfisher1976 : Well said...my thoughts exactly!
43 Administrator : Hey guys, I share your view that watermarks will somewhat lower the enjoyment for the viewers even though I have spent considerable time to make it as
44 Post contains images TS : Yes, I was referring to a dozen equalling 12. Maybe the number was 15, but that's still a tiny (but loud-voiced) minority. Do you always dismiss diff
45 Maiznblu_757 : Totally agree with you Mark...and it hurts everyone else when he practices this. The only time I ever think about giving away a free photo/use is whe
46 Danny : Cannot it be applied to the photos already in database? Since we are able to test the feature on any photo I would think it should be possible.
47 Administrator : Every re-save of a jpeg image lowers the quality of the image. The photo should be re-uploaded from the original too keep the quality high and file s
48 Post contains images Gary2880 : and how do the people stealing them know which photographers have the means to hire a lawyer. but im sure people that will steal photos in the future
49 Photopilot : Ok, here's an even better idea. Those who want the watermark and are driving this initiative are those photographers who don't want their work used el
50 Gary2880 : Its not meant to be a business though, its meant to be a photoalbum, even if it is packed of sellable HQ prints. Interesting concept though
51 Post contains images JeffM : Hardly. Laughed long and hard after reading that... You don't have to be running a business to not want your pictures used without permission.....wha
52 Post contains images INNflight : Hi Thomas, hope you're doning well. I didn't necessarily want to attack the above written comments, which all are opinions of different people, that'
53 Post contains images LGW : Hi all, Thank you Mr Watt "Those who want the watermark and are driving this initiative are those photographers who don't want their work used elsewhe
54 Post contains images Ghostbase : Trouble is that the 'whining' word does not always sit well depending where you come from. I understand that it is widely used in the USA and by Amer
55 INNflight : Thanks for clarifying that Ghostbase, really appreciated. I'll use it more selective in the future. Cheers, F.
56 JeffM : Well it WAS a good idea. But having to re-upload almost a 1,000 photos is pretty close to rediculous. Those with only 50 or 60 photos, or a 100 or so
57 Administrator : Again Jeff, this is not a feature for photos you have already uploaded to Airliners.net. This is a feature for photos you haven't dared to upload beca
58 Tappan : UNSAFE SEX..... Now that I have your attention. When a photographer puts a unique or beautiful or well done photograph on a.net without a watermark it
59 Clickhappy : I am sorry if I have misread this, I've been in the sun far too long today. Did someone say that if a non-paying visitor to this site does a search fo
60 MD-90 : Hey, Clickhappy has a very good question. Does this mean that a non-FC member such as myself will not be able to view new photos that photographers ch
61 TomTurner : Royal/MD90 - that'd be pretty funny. I think all he meant was 1st class members can still see all the images without the Watermark. I guess we'll find
62 Administrator : Absolutely not! I'm very sorry if I have been unclear. All photos will show up for all visitors as always, no matter if you are First Class or not. T
63 RG828 : Just uploaded my first pics with watermarks, I must say its a brilliant solution being able to choose where and how visible you want it. Hats off to y
64 Dazed767 : Which is wrong, but a small group of you dont seem to care what happens to your photos or who uses them, which ruins it for a lot of us. Probably why
65 Granite : Hi all Guys, give it a chance. You have the option to enable or disable at the upload stage. I have used it for the first time after uploading an imag
66 TomTurner : Regarding the sales, I had read someone complain in these forums about a year or so ago, that they were undercut by a consortium of Aviation Photograp
67 TFSPhoto : Johan, Instead of having "Airliners.net" splattered across the images, i think it would be more appropiate with the photographers name across it, and
68 Mrk25 : I think the watermark feature is a great idea, but I have to agree with TFSPhoto, the copyright is with the photographer not A.net. Mark
69 JeffM : Mark, A copyright notice and a watermark are two completely different things. A watermark is simply something placed on an image to prevent it's use
70 Neilalp : What does this do? Someone who wants to steal a photo justs pays the FC membership fee and they have themself a watermark free photo.
71 INNflight : I hardly think anybody who wants to steal a photo would pay a FC membership to do so. Also, how should he know he gets to watermark-free version when
72 A346Dude : Why not, it's only 5 bucks. For that price, they could have a month's worth of free images.
73 CMD777300ER : I don't like the visible watermark. "badmotiv" in my opinion!! I think the copyright bar at the bottom of the photograph is great. That displays the p
74 Post contains images Birdy : I am very glad that this feature has been implemented, especially after lots of discussions in two previous threads about watermarks. Aviation photog
75 Paulinbna : I have a question? I have first class membership and still SEE the water mark.
76 Syncmaster : I too am having this same problem, any suggestions? -Charlie
77 AndrewUber : Roger that, I am having that same problem. I'm a paying member, I don't pay to see watermarks. Drew
78 Post contains images JetTrader : If I were in the business of ripping off pics from airliners.net I'd certainly register as an FC member and carry on as before. This feature as imple
79 CV747 : Johan, Please Please don't! I would like to outligne the old saying again: If you're scared about others using your picture. Don't make it public! Dit
80 Administrator : That is your opinion. My professional opinion is that it is very unlikely that someone will sign up for FC to misuse photos. Remember that we have fu
81 Ariis : The question was: "Can Browse Photos page have all watermarked photos marked somehow to know it before opening?" (with a different color, notice, flo
82 Post contains images JeffM : And the answer is.......... Buy a First Class membership and the point is moot. Simple really.
83 Administrator : First Class members will now be able to view all photos without watermark. First Class members, please check it out and let me know if you run into an
84 Bottie : Works fine here ... Picture is now like it should be
85 Flyingbronco05 : I'm not a FC member and I don't see any watermarks. FB05
86 Post contains links and images A346Dude : FB05, Only a couple photos in the database have the watermark so far, such as this one: View Large View MediumPhoto © Suresh A. Atapattu It could
87 Eadster : I'll probably get blasted over this but anyway... This will have its pro's and con's. If you don't want to use it, don't. It's simple really. Protect
88 Paulinbna : Johan thanks the watermark is gone now.
89 Newark777 : Johan thanks the watermark is gone now. So now there will be a small handful of pictures with watermarks on them? Strange. Harry
90 Post contains links CV747 : This picture still has watermarks even in FC mode. http://www.airliners.net/open.file/905169/L/ Olafur
91 Post contains links Tommy Mogren : Johan, Thank you for finally implementing this feature. It is well needed and most welcome. I do have a question though... Using your test page: http:
92 Post contains images Granite : Hi all After some deliberation I have decided that I will start using it as standard from now on. Thanks for the hard work Johan, I don't always tell
93 Mrk25 : Hi everybody, Just quick note to say the watermark does do it's job. I posted a queued photo on another post to get a feel as to if it would be accept
94 Post contains images Ghostbase : With respect I really fail to see the logic in this. Does it not concern you that 'most' of the replies were complaints about using a watermark? Is p
95 Post contains links A346Dude : I think that person meant he would have used it as his desktop wallpaper, which we clearly allow (read http://www.airliners.net/usephotos/ if you don'
96 Mrk25 : My point was, if someone is not going to bother saving it as wallpaper there is good chance of preventing it being being misused in other ways.
97 United737522 : Yeah, and what is the point of even opening the picture then? If it is not worthy of being on the desktop, it really should not be worthy of being on
98 JeffM : Right up there with the most rediculous statements I have heard on here. Go to any stock photo agency's website and see if you can view non-watermark
99 Post contains images Clickhappy : Ryan, whre online is that picture of you in the captains seat wearing a captains hat, I was trying to show someone but cant seem to find it
100 JumboJim747 : Johan with all due respect you are wrong on this point. Me as i don't have a credit card i get my friends to pay for me with their cards and then i p
101 StealthZ : Absolutely.. except last time I looked and certainly not the reason I joined and started contributing to A.net, it is NOT a stock photo agency... may
102 Post contains images JeffM : So Chris, where is a good stock photo agency for airline/GA/military photos? I don't believe we are supplier of "desktop wallpaper" either.
103 TACAA320 : Thanks for the effort and for putting optional. I personally find it ugly.
104 StealthZ : Jeff, I don't know the answer to that and have not bothered to research it, maybe if there is a demand.. someone may care to fill it. Because there ma
105 JeffM : I have knew that, it's has been there for years...but it doesn't put us in the 'business' now does it? I guess you miss the point. I'm not sure why y
106 United737522 : So someone pays $5, gets the image, and the money they paid goes to airliners.net. Anyone else see something wrong with this? What is the point if the
107 StealthZ : And do you pay the 20-40+% of your revenues to A.net as commissions?...no you get the service for free!!! Oh just a hint of that famous A.net elitism
108 Post contains links Administrator : Guys, Airliners.net caters to all photographers and have therefore made the watermark feature optional. Some of you will use it, some will not. It is
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New Feature : Top Rated Photos! posted Tue Jan 3 2006 02:49:08 by AndyHunt
New Feature When Uploading posted Sat May 1 2004 13:21:26 by Codeshare
"New Feature" Suggestions... posted Fri Mar 19 2004 02:25:43 by Planeboy
Photoshop CS - New Feature posted Fri Mar 5 2004 14:47:43 by Glennstewart
New Feature On Photos? posted Wed Jun 11 2003 16:49:04 by LGB Photos
New Feature posted Sat May 31 2003 02:52:21 by Invader
New Feature - Yes Or No? posted Fri May 4 2001 05:51:43 by Cathay111
Two Shots With New L Glass posted Sun Nov 12 2006 09:37:57 by Sinkrate
New Screeners posted Sat Nov 11 2006 21:39:18 by Timdegroot
New Guy Asking For Help posted Thu Nov 9 2006 13:13:31 by LongbowPilot