Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pretty Blatant Photo Theft... On A.net  
User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5745 times:

I tried the contact us form, but it didn't seem to be working, so I guess I'll have to bring this up here...

I think something's not right here....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Keishi Nukina
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Fulsome



pretty sure that's exactly the same shot. Does this kind of .... thing... happen often? My photos are not involved, but should I try to contact Admin, screeners, or database editors?

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3308 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5730 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They are exactly the same image.

Having said that, it may be true that the image is stolen, but it may not necessarily have been the case, or deliberate. It may have been a case of a photographer lending someone his camera, sending it to them to upload, and looking back through his images and forgetting he hadn't been the one to take it.

The appropriate course of action would be to contact the screeners, in order to avoid calling out a photographer in case it was something innocent, as in the scenario I gave above.

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineSNW From Australia, joined Oct 2007, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5713 times:

There have been a couple of site bugs relating to the database and info being incorrectly attached to images and so forth - could this be a bug?
(just throwing out another possibility - don't know how possible it may be)


User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5676 times:

Yeah, as I said, I tried writing to admin via the 'contact us' form, but my browser wasn't letting me send it for some reason. Should I try screeners@airliners.net or admin@airliners.net or something like that?

I don't want to accuse anyone here, but the only reason I recognized the photo when it was added was that on another site this person had tried to pass it off as their own, along with one of my own pictures.

Moderators, please let me know the appropriate address(es) I should be sending my concerns to.


User currently offlineMat1979 From France, joined Dec 2005, 90 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5673 times:

You should have tried screeners at airliners.net but now that the thread has been created i don't think there is any need for emailing them...

User currently offlineScotland1979 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 548 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5626 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Thanks for bringing it up! We, the screeners, are taking care of these photos.

Thanks again!



Jesus said "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" - John 14:6
User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5616 times:



Quoting Scotland1979 (Reply 5):
Thanks for bringing it up! We, the screeners, are taking care of these photos.

You're welcome! Just for future reference, should something like this (hopefully not) happen again, it's the screeners, not admin, etc., who are the ones to contact?

thanks.


User currently offlineBrasila684 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5549 times:



Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 6):
Just for future reference, should something like this (hopefully not) happen again, it's the screeners, not admin, etc., who are the ones to contact?

I'm not a photo screener or anything, but you should contact the photo screeners via their email at screeners@airliners.net (I hope  Smile)


Brasila684


SkyWest Baby!!!!


User currently offlineStil From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 345 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5447 times:

Hi.

I think the problem is not the screening process. The problem is that 'double' rejection needs to be redefined.
It happens more times than aesthetically desirable that 2 pictures are accepted being susbstancially identical -not this case, as they are the same-, but taken by 2 different photographers standing beside each other and shooting to the same aircraft at the same moment.
When someone is surfing through the latest additions and sees two identical thumbnails, the first thing that springs to mind is that an error ocurred somewhere. Yes, if you see the 2 pictures you'll find they're slightly different; but it's some kind of "visual cacophony".
I don't know anything about the screening process, but maybe the screener checked the similar pictures of the same aircraft and found the first published of this two, but as they came from different photographers he didn't pay further attention.
Just my opinion, although.

Stil



....... Gueropppa! ......
User currently offlineG-CIVP From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1326 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5445 times:

The only problem Stil is that aviation photography as become so competitive at LHR, it is difficult to see how a double rule could be applied fairly without discriminating against different photographers. Just do a search on PT-MUC @ LHR to see what I'm on about.

User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5423 times:



Quoting G-CIVP (Reply 9):
could be applied fairly without discriminating against different photographers.

Whoever uploads first then. However, I'd like to think we can all upload a photo of the same thing, even if they are similar - as long as the photo is good. No two photos are ever quite the same.

It's competitive everywhere - it's just the way the game has become. People getting better cameras, better lenses and doing their utmost to get the better photo than the next person. Hell, we are on a level where we routinely get better photos than some of the photographers on salary at certain aviation magazines. Some of us (ie, not me) probably well out-do the regular press photographers too. I'm pretty certain some of us have an armada of camera equipment they would love to have.

It is pretty competitive, and some comments on another forum confirmed the way things sometimes are. Whenever a desirable new plane is spotted, you can't tell me there isn't ambition within some of these photographers to get more views/more prominence than the next person to photograph the same thing. If you tell me that it doesn't matter - then you are being economical with the truth - or you are a politician.

Even I like to get prominence to my photos - but not at the expense of things gettiing 'competitive' in the way G-CIVP in the message above might be suggesting (if I've understood right).


User currently offlineStil From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 345 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5385 times:



Quoting G-CIVP (Reply 9):
Just do a search on PT-MUC @ LHR to see what I'm on about.

My God! I do perfectly see what you are talking about and I have to admit you're right, it would be quite difficult to apply this rule fairly and maybe -just maybe- it will add more problems than solutions.
But many of the pictures on your example would fit in the thread start, as some of them are identical, and a way -not the only one- to prevent this is redefining the 'double' concept. Maybe the first submitted would have priority and thus force the photographers to try slight differents views of the same aircraft in such competitive situations.
I'm conscious of what I'm stating here is way too easier to say when your home airport is a small one with no situations like this one at all, but once more, I'm just giving my opinion.

Stil



....... Gueropppa! ......
User currently offlineSamuel32 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2005, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5277 times:

Guys its heading for the top of the day which is really a shame for the original photographer because hes not being credited for it (even though its been uploaded few years ago)...

Fix it...


User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5498 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 5277 times:

I'm surprised Michael Fulsome's photo which isn't his is still up.

User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2328 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5251 times:



Quoting Dazed767 (Reply 13):
I'm surprised Michael Fulsome's photo which isn't his is still up.

haha! it's been 23 hours and now the photo is one of the Top 5 of 24 hours. what kind of paperwork needs to be filled out, before someone who can make a decision, takes it down?



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlinePlainplane From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 846 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5238 times:

I remember someone posting about that before - where someone uploaded an image and it put someone else's image in its place, however the description matched whatever the image should have been.

However this one seems like a clear cut case. What a shame. BOO THIEF BOO!!!


User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6758 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5223 times:



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 14):
before someone who can make a decision, takes it down?

I imagine all sides of the story have to be gone into before a decision is made and if it takes time to contact someone then nothing may appear to happen. Maybe there should be a quarantine so questionable photos are not accesible until issues like this are sorted. I know this will then lead to questions about where the "dodgy" photos are so should such threads be deleted, or at least closed, once the issue has been raised?



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlinePictureThis From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 196 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5098 times:



Quoting G-CIVP (Reply 9):
Just do a search on PT-MUC @ LHR to see what I'm on about.

Haha, that is hilarious.

With around 700 views for each photo though, the visitors still wan't to see the photos, regardless of the amount.

Though about 7 photos its quite funny.



Make sure they know we're playing the game, but we don't need to play the game because we've already won the game.
User currently offlineSovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 5096 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting G-CIVP (Reply 9):

What amazes me is the fact that all of these photos have variations in the sky color and such, yet they were shot at the same exact time. Some have a nice blue sky, while others seem hazy. So which photo is correct  Smile ?

Another example of this oversaturation(no pun intended) at English airports is this:

http://www.airliners.net/search/phot...truecount=false&engine_version=6.0


User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6758 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5043 times:



Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 18):
Another example of this oversaturation(no pun intended) at English airports is this:

So what's the record for the most photos of the same plane at about the same time by different photographers? 13 is going to take some beating.



wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlineG-CIVP From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1326 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 4993 times:

Cpd,

I think it is going to depend on the subject matter. In the context of PT-MUC at LHR on the 3rd January 2009, it was already on the database, so wasn't a 'first'. If two photographers get a first, then I no issue with them sharing the glory. I think this was an exceptional episode but is not uncommon. Just see F-ORMA at LHR. Whether this should be stopped, I think it is a difficult call as it would be an arbitrary rule.

True, no photos are never quite the same, but if you look at PT-MUC photos for the date above, these are very similar. This was an 09L arrival at LHR and the opportunities for variation are limited. It's going to be a sky shot whatever.

I agree with your comments on competition. Simply, digital cameras have reduced the barriers to entry and photographers from a wider pool can now submit photos to magazines, websites, etc. I think there are those photographers, especially on the LHR, LGW, LTN, STN circuit who are very competitive and are keen to demonstrate their output on anet. I think anet does fuel this ambition. This said, it's down to them; if they wish to spend their spare time at airfields, then that's their choice. Whether money can be made, that's another matter. The short answer is yes but not enough to replace the day job or for a Mayfair address.

To demonstrate the competitive streak that now dominates , I have known one photographer at LHR to come armed with a laptop, take the photo, edit it and go to the nearest wi-fi spot to upload to anet!

Sovietjet - If what I recall, the smog didn't help but it was slightly clearer towards the runway threshold! I just bumped up the levels.

Happy shutter-bugging!

LHR Photos


User currently offlineKetko2 From Slovakia, joined Sep 2006, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4819 times:

Hi, as a photographer of that photo (Keishi) am wondering, what really happened.

Cause it really seems, its just reupload of my photo, since the crop, the colors and everything is the same.

Hope its just some DB error.

Regards, Keishi


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4738 times:



Quoting Ketko2 (Reply 21):
It really seems, its just reupload of my photo, since the crop, the colors and everything is the same.

It's the same photo.

The photographer has just this single photo on a.net, and joined the site 32 days ago. If this is a DB error, he's really unlucky.

He seems to be user CanonPhotog, who wrote a post about the Canon 800 mm lens in this forum, then said that this was just what his neighbour said about it.

Kieshi, did you try sending him a message?

Peter Smile



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4721 times:



Quoting Ketko2 (Reply 21):
Hope its just some DB error.



Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 22):
If this is a DB error, he's really unlucky.



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 14):
what kind of paperwork needs to be filled out, before someone who can make a decision, takes it down?

Well, it's been almost three days now, and nothing's been done, so I guess I'll tell you guys (as I mentioned earlier) that I highly doubt this is a mistake/error.

I only noticed the photo as being already in the db because on another site the guy who uploaded it had been trying to claim he had taken it, along with other photos from a.net (including my own). He was called out pretty easily there (as the photo credits didn't match his id), and he ended up being banned from the site. I would guess that the screeners/whomever was to deal with this was waiting for a response from the guy, but I think he's had enough time, especially given that we've heard from the real photographer now.

Sorry about all this Keishi, but I think you deserve not to have credit for this photo stolen from you (and it is a great shot by the way!)


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 24, posted (5 years 8 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4710 times:



Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 23):
I only noticed the photo as being already in the db because on another site the guy who uploaded it had been trying to claim he had taken it, along with other photos from a.net (including my own). He was called out pretty easily there (as the photo credits didn't match his id), and he ended up being banned from the site

Then the case is pretty obvious. Why didn't you say this before?

Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 23):
I would guess that the screeners/whomever was to deal with this was waiting for a response from the guy, but I think he's had enough time, especially given that we've heard from the real photographer now.

Agreed.



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
25 Cpd : I agree with those thoughts. Seeing the TU-154 mentioned above, that's a obvious example, where does the line need to be drawn. But if it were me, I'
26 Dlowwa : Well, I didn't want to seem too accusatory, or set out too much of a negative tone, given that protocol in these forums is not to go around calling o
27 Viv : There is no proof that he is a photographer - the disputed duplicate shot is the only one he has uploaded. It appears to be a clear case of plagiaris
28 Dlowwa : You know what, you're absolutely right. Let's call him the other 'uploader' then. Me too.
29 Psych : I am pleased to see that the apparently stolen photo has now been removed. Paul
30 GPHOTO : Yes Paul, I can confirm that after looking into the matter, the image has now been removed. Best regards, Jim
31 G-CIVP : Just to say, I always love a happy ending!
32 WILCO737 : And the case is closed: thread locked. wilco737[Edited 2009-01-24 06:24:24]
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...
Your First Photo On A.net posted Wed Sep 19 2007 06:54:06 by Flyboyseven
A.net Photo Featured On Fark.com posted Mon Apr 24 2006 23:24:28 by USAFHummer
A.NET Stolen Photo Used On BIG Bird DIE-CAST posted Wed Feb 22 2006 05:09:38 by Marco_Polo
My First Accepted Photo On A.net! posted Fri Feb 17 2006 01:17:31 by TUNisia
Best Photo You Have On A.net posted Wed Feb 15 2006 00:23:44 by Garri767
My First Photo On A.net! posted Sun Oct 10 2004 04:36:44 by FoxBravo
Airliners.Net Photo Used On NYTimes (illegally?) posted Wed May 26 2004 02:50:23 by Aviationwiz
1st Photo On A.net After Over 50 Tries! posted Fri Jan 23 2004 18:02:11 by MartinairYYZ
Finally Got A Photo On A.net... posted Sun Dec 21 2003 15:56:13 by DC-10Tech
Update On BigBird Photo Theft? posted Sun Nov 9 2003 22:40:24 by Fly-K