Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Stealing Images The Right Way.........  
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

I am not 100% sure but I'd appreciate some other opinions:

Check this one out

taken from
http://os.propserver.com/fleet-details.php?aircraft_id=237



and this one


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia



To me it looks like that they cropped out the airliners.net watermark and used the rest of the picture.

Funny enough I talked to them on Friday to negotiate a price.........now it seems the price went up quite a bit!!!!!!

Vasco

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMorvious From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 707 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3807 times:

Quoting AKE0404AR (Thread starter):
Funny enough I talked to them on Friday to negotiate a price.........now it seems the price went up quite a bit!!!!!!

Yeah nail them.. That will atleast teach them I hope!!

Keep us updated!
Stefan van Hierden



have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
User currently offlineAndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 41
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 3776 times:

Nail their asses Vasco - they blatantly STOLE your photo, MODIFIED it, and are PROFITING from it (by promoting their aircraft).

The price should go up ten fold. Make an example out of this case with them - let them know that this crap will NOT be tolerated. Don't go easy on them or they'll keep doing it in the future.

Good luck, and please do keep us posted.

Drew



I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
User currently offlineSleekjet From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2046 posts, RR: 22
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Vasco: How did you find out this was being done?


II Cor. 4:17-18
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Well, I knew for which website they wanted to use the shot (since the person mentioned it during our telephone conversation on Friday) and they were looking for other photos as well.

So I just browsed their site to see what's already there................that they just went ahead, cropped out the watermark and put the image up on their site is just plain dumb, if you ask me.

Vasco


User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3652 times:

This was at the Dubai air show right? They will probably say that shot is from another photographer who shot it. However looking at it closely, the tracks on the carpet are the same in both shots, as well as the reflections near the front of the cabin.

User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3567 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 5):
This was at the Dubai air show right? They will probably say that shot is from another photographer who shot it. However looking at it closely, the tracks on the carpet are the same in both shots, as well as the reflections near the front of the cabin.

It is my shot, there is no doubt about it!


User currently offlineDFW13L From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3555 times:

If it was taken by someone else, then they did so at the exact same moment, because the light from the side window on the floor and on the left seat are exactly the same, and these move with the sun quite fast. Plus the magazines and the overexposure by the doorway. No question. Please update us on the outcome!

User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3539 times:

Quoting AKE0404AR (Thread starter):
To me it looks like that they cropped out the airliners.net watermark and used the rest of the picture.

Are you sure, they cropped out the A.net watermark? To me, it looks, as if they didn't see the watermark at all - AFAIK, FC members don't see the watermark.

Or did you mean the "A.net copyright bar"?

Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineILOVEA340 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 2100 posts, RR: 4
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3525 times:

I just did a transperency overlay of them in the stupidest program known to man (ESRI ArcMap) and sure enough I am quite confident that they did in fact cut the watermark as the photo was cropped just a few pixels above where the watermark would have been.

User currently offlinePepef From Finland, joined Oct 2002, 440 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

So what happened to the table? In Vasco's photo it covers part of the seat on the captain's side. Where did the seatbelts come from, which aren't in Vasco's photo? It's not the same photo.


-pepef-


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3513 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pepef (Reply 10):
So what happened to the table? In Vasco's photo it covers part of the seat on the captain's side. Where did the seatbelts come from, which aren't in Vasco's photo? It's not the same photo.

Ah they got caught... the photo in that link about 12 hours ago was Vasco's, since they were busted they have changed the image.

Hope you took a screen dump Vasco!

C



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3504 times:

Either they bough an image very quickly or i hope they get caught again 

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sean Norman – t.dot photography


[Edited 2006-03-06 12:12:28]


-
User currently offlineBeechcraft From Germany, joined Nov 2003, 828 posts, RR: 42
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3500 times:

Wow,
They´re stealing and covering that up by stealing something else.
Quite creative!!!!

Denis



That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college!
User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3435 times:

Quoting AKE0404AR (Thread starter):
cropped out the airliners.net watermark and used the rest of the picture.

That's why using it in the middle of the pic should be a thing to consider.  Smile
After all, the watermark should cover the main object, not just some sky or floor. It's useless there.

Good luck Vasco.

cheers,
F.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

Quoting Gerardo (Reply 8):
Are you sure, they cropped out the A.net watermark? To me, it looks, as if they didn't see the watermark at all - AFAIK, FC members don't see the watermark.

Yes, the cropped out the watermark! That is a fact!

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 12):
Either they bought an image very quickly or i hope they get caught again

Some other a.net photographer took their first offer!

The image was taken down. Case closed!


User currently offlineAirplanePeanut From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 452 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3311 times:

woops, didn't read far enough :-p

  Peanut

[Edited 2006-03-07 03:30:58]


..
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3270 times:

Well it seems that the case is closed for me, but they just opened another case. The shot showing up on the screen is from a fellow a.net photographer and guess what.......they did not ask for permission either. How dare they are!!!!!


No his shot is the thumbnail and if you click on the image mine comes up again..........

Unbelievable

Vasco G.


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 31
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3257 times:

WOW! Really dumb!!

Go get them, Vasco!

Cheers
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineAKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3183 times:

This is the answer I have gotten this afternoon after I sent them an invoice for the usage:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Garcia,

I hope this email reaches you well, I have been briefed by my colleague
______ as to the situation regarding the use of an image of a Piaggio
aircraft.

As you will be aware, design agencies use the fantastic resources that
are photo libraries on a daily basis, the libraries provide excellent
images and concepts that provide designers with creative direction and
ideas when developing a project.

We use low resolution images from all sorts of sites to provide our
clients with ideas and concepts - then when the client accepts the
chosen concept we always go back and pay for the images that will be
used in the final project.

Now whilst you have seen one of your images on a site we have designed,
that site was not live - in fact the site is still undergoing client
requested changes as we speak. The site is currently hosted on our
development server, and will remain there until we have bought all the
images we intend to use on the site (which we are almost through
doing).

Every other supplier of photography we've bought images from is only
too helpful in recommending other images from their library we could
use, in fact its often resulted in us buying more images from them then
we originally anticipated - they're obviously happy with this
arrangement!

Reluctantly we're now not able to use your image and have removed it
from the web site, you can also rest assured we will not use any of
your images in any future projects that require aircraft images.

I wish you every luck in the future with your photography.

Yours sincerely

--------------------------------------------------------------------
What a load of bulls..t


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3152 times:

Hey listen up guys,

I am TOTALLY in agreement with Vasco on this.

However, I've been in the same boat recently but in a different photo
subject and you ALWAYS get more flies with honey than vinegar.

Sad but true................


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3132 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Firstly let me say I am supprtive of Vasco in this matter.

Now, perhaps space for some "benefit of doubt" for the website developer.
Perhaps a mistake was made in letting a development site get out into the real world. I have no idea where Vasco got the URL he linked in his posting but it looks to me like a development site.
Perhaps the 2nd photo used was not a reaction to being "busted" but an attempt to provide choices to their client.
Maybe they were going to pay when they decided on the final photos, maybe not. What does appear certain is they will not be using Vasco's photos and most likely none from A.net.
I have noticed over the past year a fairly consistant adversarial atmosphere between the photographers here and the "customer". Is that healthy? Perhaps it is a slanted view because only the bad experiences get talked about? I don't know.

Not sure this line of thought is going to endear me to many here but it is my 2 cents worth!

Cheers
Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2717 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3118 times:

Well it's absolute BS to say this is a development website. It doesn't have some obscure URL leading to a development server. The URL is the direct name of the company leading right onto the website.

Go get em and make them pay.


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3113 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 22):
The URL is the direct name of the company leading right onto the website.

Not exactly if my company name was Ocean Sky, I would not want something like os.propserver.com as my URL but if I was a web development and marketing company called Propeller Studios it is possible that it would be the URL of a site under development for a client. I think the big mistake was not securing it so that access was restricted.

But I don't mind continue with the us and them thing!

C



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2717 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3112 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 23):



Quoting StealthZ (Reply 23):
Not exactly if my company name was Ocean Sky, I would not want something like os.propserver.com as my URL

Just type in the following Company Name

www.oceansky.com

You will find that it opens the or.propserver.com directly.


25 StealthZ : I know that, but I still tend to think that is either a mistake by the Web content provider or the client.. not how I would structure my site.. or a
26 AKE0404AR : Mistake or not, live or not....at this point I really don't care! The image was posted on their website! If I am gonna get money out of this, I am not
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...
Whats The Best Way To Shrink My Photos? posted Fri Apr 14 2006 23:15:12 by Mason
Help This F/O Pick Out The Right Cam Please! posted Wed Apr 12 2006 18:48:28 by Pilotaydin
Expose To The Right: A Test, With Pics posted Thu Mar 23 2006 02:20:51 by D L X
Am I On The Right Track? posted Tue Mar 7 2006 02:37:51 by Kmonroe
Ticket The Right Box While Uploading DC-2 Pic. posted Mon Jul 18 2005 17:18:11 by Embraer145
Is This The Proper Way To Crop This Photo? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 00:34:04 by WakeTurbulence
Sensor Cleaning...the Lazy Way posted Fri Dec 10 2004 12:03:55 by LGW
Being In The Right Place At The Right Time posted Tue Jan 27 2004 22:24:45 by Manzoori
Is This The Right Reason For Rejection? posted Wed May 22 2002 12:24:17 by Jacek
The New Way Of Screening Photos - I Dont Get It! posted Wed Feb 13 2002 15:36:36 by LGW