JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 4647
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:56 am

Another thread raging at the minute got me thinking about this. Is it possible to get a shot accepted without editing it in any way whatsoever (apart from the necessary re-sizing)? Has this ever been achieved? I'm not thinking of trying it but the notion has got me wondering.

Karl
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:15 am

Karl,

I would say you can get a picture accepted with minimal editing. Its the right way to go from the start. The U2 shot in the previous thread is exposed spot on. All it needs is a tighter crop, and a touch of sharpening as below:

http://www1.airliners.net/uf/536892555/1164921282FYhxpo.jpg

Regards
Colin
 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 4647
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:24 am

Cheers Colin, that's the shot I was actually referring to when I posted. When I put it up in the other thread I had a good close look at it and realised it was free from dust spots and the exposure looked good.

I won't attempt to upload it but I was curious as to if anyone had ever had a decent acceptance rate without editing.

The other thread got me thinking, "If I didn't need to edit my pics I wouldn't be cheating myself and I could probably get something on A.net.

We'll see.

Karl
 
Chukcha
Posts: 2019
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:57 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:15 am

In the good old times of 'dark room' photography and dubious quality photographic film and paper, any shortcomings of the negative image were corrected while printing, by choosing appropriate paper, adjusting print exposure, and, in the case of colour photography, by using the colour correction filters. I'll bet you the photographers didn't think of it as 'editing' then.

As digital photography is, by and large, a one-step process, the Photoshop editing just makes up for the now missing printing step, and used in the same way to correct minor flaws. Now, WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT?
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:33 am

Quoting JakTrax (Thread starter):
Is it possible to get a shot accepted without editing it in any way whatsoever (apart from the necessary re-sizing)?

Yup, got plenty, not all mentioned in the remarks....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeff Miller

 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 4647
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:19 am

Sounds good. At least if I ever attempt to chuck anything A.net's way it'll have a chance of being accepted without me having to faff around for hours doing this and that.

Cheers.
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 1:50 am

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 5):
faff around for hours

You don't need hours, just minutes. Grab a cup off coffee, sit back, and before you know it, you'll be alllll done.
 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 4647
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 2:52 am

Quoting Linco22 (Reply 6):
You don't need hours, just minutes. Grab a cup off coffee, sit back, and before you know it, you'll be alllll done.

Just one problem - I don't own Photoshop.

One thing I've learned from these threads recently is that I will more than likely benefit greatly from a copy of PS.

If I get a copy, I suppose learning how to use it could be time-consuming. I ain't a whizz with computers!

Hopefully I won't get too carried away and become heavily reliant upon the program! Maybe I could just use it to rub out the odd bird or dust spot.....

.....and then in the next step maybe I can put BA's livery on a Tu-154.....

Karl
 
jorge1812
Posts: 2911
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 9:11 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:13 am

Quoting JakTrax (Thread starter):
Another thread

Which one?

Georg
 
9V
Posts: 1368
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:35 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:35 am

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 7):
Just one problem - I don't own Photoshop

Then either buy a copy or get someone to put it on disc for you, It's not rocket science.  banghead 

How old is your pc? All pc's now come with free editing software. If your's is powered by gas it might be worth buying a new one.  Wink
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:56 am

You should have a copy of elements bundled with your Canon software. I'll bet most here are not graphic designers or professionals - you've got to start somewhere, and for the purposes of a.net the techniques are easy to learn, if difficult to master.

Really you owe it to yourself to have a play with PS - you can really bring out the pretty in a decent image.


James
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:05 am

Quoting 9V (Reply 9):
get someone to put it on disc for you

so steal it?  confused 
 
flyfisher1976
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:08 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:51 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 11):
so steal it?

Why not? If you can get away with it.  Wink
 
CalgaryBill
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:27 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:06 am

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 12):
Why not? If you can get away with it.

Uh, because it's illegal??? I guess you don't mind people using your pictures for themselves either? What a sad state we're in when people publicly claim that stealing someone else's work is okay.  Angry

B
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 3:19 am

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 12):
Why not? If you can get away with it.

I would think a person that holds the copyright on many works such as everyone that posts to this forum would respect the copyrights of others, especially when it is the source of their livelihood. I speak as a former software engineer.
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:21 am

If people have a large enough bank balance to pay the massively inflated price of licenced software then so be it, but understand that not everyone is in that position and somehow claiming the moral high ground is absurd.


Perhaps if the companies who develop the software marketed it at a more affordable price then less people would want to copy it anyway.

Anyway, back on topic, if you are going to upload "unedited" shots, do you need to use some in-camera sharpening.

Regards,

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:28 am

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 13):
Uh, because it's illegal???

So is speeding  Wink
The price of PS is inflated indeed.

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 15):
Anyway, back on topic, if you are going to upload "unedited" shots, do you need to use some in-camera sharpening.

Which is very likely to produce jaggy images and will be hard to eliminate.
Like I said it in another thread, you are expected to edit your shots with a DSLR to make them perfect. But hey, if you're happy with what the camera produces without any post processing... each to their own.

Ivan
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:33 am

How do you get them looking sharp enough without though Ivan? Mine look too soft.

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:38 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 17):
How do you get them looking sharp enough without though Ivan? Mine look too soft.

You don't. At least not sharp enough for A.net. Mine are soft as well.

Ivan
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:20 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 15):
If people have a large enough bank balance to pay the massively inflated price of licenced software then so be it, but understand that not everyone is in that position and somehow claiming the moral high ground is absurd.

How much did you pay for your camera? DSLR, right?
How much did you pay for your lenses? L glass, right?

Those are pretty expensive. Did you even consider robbing a store to get it?
I'm guessing you didn't, but why not?

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 15):
Perhaps if the companies who develop the software marketed it at a more affordable price then less people would want to copy it anyway.

It costs money to make that software, you know. Do you know how many man-hours went into making Photoshop? Those people have to put food on the table, pay for a roof over their heads, pay back student loans, etc. They don't do it just for fun.

Would you feel the same way about people ripping off your photos and using them for their own purposes?
 
CalgaryBill
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:27 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:27 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 15):
If people have a large enough bank balance to pay the massively inflated price of licenced software then so be it, but understand that not everyone is in that position and somehow claiming the moral high ground is absurd.

Anyone who can afford a digital camera can afford Elements, it even ships "free" with some cameras. I guess if someone wants to use your pictures and think your price is inflated, then they should just steal it? If you can't afford a tool then don't use it - that's just the way it is. I guess aspiring photographers who can't afford Elements surely can't afford a digital camera, so they should steal that too?

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 16):
So is speeding

Oh, now I get it. If you do one thing illegally then anything goes.

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 16):
The price of PS is inflated indeed.

If it's so lucrative everyone and their dog would be creating it. Maybe it's more likely the price is inflated because they don't sell much since everyone is willing to give it away. Or maybe every Software Engineering grad isn't creating their own version because it really isn't that lucrative.

If spending ninety bucks on a software package rather than rationalizing stealing it is the "moral highground" then I guess I'm on it after all.

B
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:28 am

To all those that are planning on stealing software because it's too expensive, consider:

Photoshop Elements 5.0: $69.99
Photoshop CS2: $549 (sell your kit lens)
Photoshop 7.0: $199.99
Photoshop Upgrade to CS2 (from 7.0!): 144.99 (cheaper than buying the whole CS2 version!)

Corel Paint Shop Pro XI: $74.23.

Canon 350D: $600 w/shkit lens.
Nikon D70s: $640 w/o lens.
I think my point is clear.
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:35 am

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 20):
Anyone who can afford a digital camera can afford Elements, it even ships "free" with some cameras.

So what's the difference if it comes with the camera or someone burns it for you?

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 20):
Quoting Fly747 (Reply 16):
So is speeding

Oh, now I get it. If you do one thing illegally then anything goes.

That's not what it means. Same goes the other way around though.

Quoting D L X (Reply 21):
Photoshop CS2: $549 (sell your kit lens)

That must be some kit lens.

Ivan
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:45 am

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 22):
So what's the difference if it comes with the camera or someone burns it for you?

The difference is that if it came with the camera, you paid for it, albeit indirectly.

Analogy: You can buy a body, or you can buy a kit. The fact that you only bought a body doesn't give you the right to go steal a lens, just because other people had the lens included.
 
flyfisher1976
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:08 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:50 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 15):
somehow claiming the moral high ground is absurd.

 checkmark 

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
How much did you pay for your camera? DSLR, right?

 checkmark 

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
How much did you pay for your lenses? L glass, right?

 checkmark 

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Those are pretty expensive. Did you even consider robbing a store to get it?

Yes, but I probably would've gotten caught.

The point is that it's *very easy* to "steal" software and music by copying...it probably always will be. I'm sure if it was as easy to steal a 20D and 100-400L from the local camera store as it is to copy a software CD, a lot more people would do it.

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Do you know how many man-hours went into making Photoshop? Those people have to put food on the table, pay for a roof over their heads, pay back student loans, etc. They don't do it just for fun.

 Yeah sure Come on now...We're not feeding the hungry here, just helping to offset the monumental cost of producing and marketing a worthless piece of plastic.

Quoting D L X (Reply 14):
I would think a person that holds the copyright on many works such as everyone that posts to this forum would respect the copyrights of others, especially when it is the source of their livelihood.

I would imagine that only a small percentage of people who submit photos here rely on photography for a source of their livlelyhood.

While I wouldn't want any of my photos taken without permission or payment, I can't say I blame anyone for trying. It's just so easy to do. Really, it's okay...take all the photos you want...just don't let me catch you!  Wink
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:00 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
The difference is that if it came with the camera, you paid for it, albeit indirectly.

It didn't come with mine and I bought the same product (camera). So I still paid for the camera, but didn't get a freebie. That's what I mean when I say, what's the difference. They are giving it away for free with some cameras.

Ivan
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:34 am

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 25):
what's the difference

The difference is that the camera manufacturer has paid for it.

Stealing is theft, no matter how you dress it up.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:19 am

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 24):
Come on now...We're not feeding the hungry here,

So, stealing is okay unless you're stealing from the poor?

I'm surprised there are people actually justifying this, considering how much people bitch about photo theft. Talk about an easy mark!
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:33 am

Quoting Viv (Reply 26):
Stealing is theft, no matter how you dress it up.

I never said it wasn't stealing, but it is widely accepted that people download copyrighted material from the net, be it music, photographs, programs, etc. The list goes on.

Ivan
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:43 am

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 28):
it is widely accepted that people download copyrighted material from the net,

No. It's not. Only by those that steal stuff.
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 10:45 am

Quoting JeffM (Reply 29):
No. It's not. Only by those that steal stuff.

Let me rephrase that, widely known fact.
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:17 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
Those are pretty expensive. Did you even consider robbing a store to get it?
I'm guessing you didn't, but why not?

I haven't said I have stolen anything, I'm just saying that to criticise those who use copied software is unfair. Of course I'd like a new 400D and 70-200L lens for next to nothing, but how do you go about getting them?

Quoting D L X (Reply 19):
It costs money to make that software, you know. Do you know how many man-hours went into making Photoshop? Those people have to put food on the table, pay for a roof over their heads, pay back student loans, etc. They don't do it just for fun.

Sure they don't do it for fun, but I'm sure you're aware of the mark-up that is made on such products. The directors of large software companies are hardly on the breadline trying to feed starving mouths. If you're working for peanuts for one of these organisations, then feel aggrieved.

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 20):
Anyone who can afford a digital camera can afford Elements, it even ships "free" with some cameras. I guess if someone wants to use your pictures and think your price is inflated, then they should just steal it?

Elements is good, I have two versions myself, but this argument is about far more than one product or even one company.

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 20):
I guess aspiring photographers who can't afford Elements surely can't afford a digital camera, so they should steal that too?

Do I sense the photography "financial elitism" that permeates this forum so often? As I say, how on earth are you to get a 400D otherwise without buying it at retail price?

Is software an easy target? Perhaps, but you can't blame people, or feel sorry for the developers when the public obtain it by other means, when the companies who develop it are amongst the most profitable on earth. This argument reaches far beyond using unlicensed software, but if you think that those activities are wrong, then you're failing to see the big picture.


I can see this thread becoming archive material pretty quickly.

Regards,

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
flyfisher1976
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:08 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:36 am

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 22):
So what's the difference if it comes with the camera or someone burns it for you?

Really people, what ae we tlking about here...a round piece of plastic that costs pennies to produce. Don't worry, Adobe made their money a long time ago.

If you've ever selected someones picture from this web site as your desktop background without the photographers permission, you're guilty of copyright infringement. You have made a copy of the image file that now resides on your computer. If you really want to get nit-picky, you could say that the only difference between the theft of the software and the theft of the image for your desktop is a matter of megabytes. So all of you on your high horses caliming that this is "wrong"...take a look in the mirror....I'm sure your guilty of some digital "crime" too.
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:49 am

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
If you've ever selected someones picture from this web site as your desktop background without the photographers permission, you're guilty of copyright infringement.

Actually, not true. It's in the license, if I'm not mistaken.

BTW, D L X = intellectual property attorney.  Wink

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
If you really want to get nit-picky, you could say that the only difference between the theft of the software and the theft of the image for your desktop is a matter of megabytes.

And the fact that the makers of Photoshop said "You do NOT have license to make copies of this." Can't forget that... you did agree to a contract when you opted to use the program.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
a round piece of plastic that costs pennies to produce. Don't worry, Adobe made their money a long time ago.

You're showing that you have no idea what it costs to produce software. You're a smart guy, so I'm a little surprised. If it's just the little piece of plastic you want, I'll give you one for free. It's blank.

What's that you say?

You don't want a blank one?

Oh.. that's right! You want the one with the VERY EXPENSIVE INFORMATION on it.
 
CalgaryBill
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:27 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:09 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 27):
I'm surprised there are people actually justifying this, considering how much people bitch about photo theft. Talk about an easy mark!

You're not kidding. I can't believe people are actually publicly trying to rationalize theft.

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 31):
Elements is good, I have two versions myself, but this argument is about far more than one product or even one company.

No, it's just a plain ol' ethical argument about theft. Either buy the tool you can afford, or find another legit way to get it. Theft is theft regardless of the players or the scale.

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 31):
Do I sense the photography "financial elitism" that permeates this forum so often? As I say, how on earth are you to get a 400D otherwise without buying it at retail price?

Suggesting that "buy your software legally" is financial elitism makes no sense whatsoever. Just because you can rip off software in the privacy of your own home doesn't make it more ethical than walking into a camera store and swiping a 400D.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
Really people, what ae we tlking about here...a round piece of plastic that costs pennies to produce. Don't worry, Adobe made their money a long time ago.

And that makes it okay to steal from them? If you don't like their prices, don't use their software or go buy stock in their company. The shares are selling for $39-ish (shouldn't be out of reach of the financially elite) and yielded a whopping 84 cents over the last year. Not exactly a financial elitist's definition of a high profit company.

But again, stealing from anyone is still theft whether they're rich or poor, or whether you do it in your own home or a camera store.

B
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:18 pm

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
Don't worry, Adobe made their money a long time ago.

Maybe they can make some more if we turn in Joseph Del Guidice to their legal department?

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 32):
If you've ever selected someones picture from this web site as your desktop background without the photographers permission, you're guilty of copyright infringement.

You have very poor reading comprehension skills........Take a look at this...it's on the photo usage page...

Restrictions on the usage of photos

Quoting Airliners:

All photos on this site are protected by international copyright laws.
You have limited rights to personally view the images with your web browser and to use them as your personal computer wallpaper (or background image) on your own computer.
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:25 pm

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 34):
You're not kidding. I can't believe people are actually publicly trying to rationalize theft.

People are are not trying to justify it, merely place an argument to suggest why it is not so unacceptable.

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 34):
No, it's just a plain ol' ethical argument about theft.

By people who can't afford to help pay for the CEO of software companies to fly around in Gulfstreams.

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 34):
Suggesting that "buy your software legally" is financial elitism makes no sense whatsoever. Just because you can rip off software in the privacy of your own home doesn't make it more ethical than walking into a camera store and swiping a 400D.

You're stealing from the store and also there is a perceived level of criminality attached.

The point I'm making in all this is that I cannot see how someone can be criticised for using unlicensed software when it is so readily available, a fraction of the cost of the genuine thing and the software companies are so wealthy. I really don't have a problem with it morally.

Regards,

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:44 pm

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 36):
really don't have a problem with it morally.

Most people who steal do not have such a problem. If they had a moral problem, they would not steal. But theft is theft, regardless of what the thief may feel about it.

The argument seems to be that (a) software is expensive; (b) it is easy to steal and the stolen version is cheap; (c) many people do it so it is acceptable; (d) The manufacturers are rich companies so it is ok to rip them off.
Sorry, but it is still theft.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:10 pm

Completely f*cking off topic. Nice one guys.

[Edited 2006-12-03 12:12:10]
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
flyfisher1976
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:08 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:17 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 35):
Maybe they can make some more if we turn in Joseph Del Guidice to their legal department?

 laughing  I'm sure they've got better things to do.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 35):
You have very poor reading comprehension skills........Take a look at this...it's on the photo usage page...

The world according to Airliners.net
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:16 am

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 40):

Millions of kids sit and download music, often with parental knowledge. Surely we can't criminalise them?

Surely we could, an should. It doesn't matter if a kid is breaking the law with or without their parents knowledge.

Rationalizing theft of any kind is unacceptable.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 40):
It's too readily available and I really don't think you can blame people for taking advantage. With all that money the software companies are making by selling this stuff, surely they can afford to introduce some sort of advanced security system whereby it can't be copied or cracked?

That has got to be the lamest exuse I've heard yet. You can't say that because a company is making money from a product you can go ahead and steal it.

You are sounding more and more like an absolute Jack A$$.
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:33 am

Quoting JeffM (Reply 41):
You are sounding more and more like an absolute Jack A$$

Agreed, he does. It is very hard to reason with people like that.

Sure, some theft is worse than others, but ALL theft is unacceptable, whether committed by adults, by kids with or without parental knowledge, whether against poor people or "rich" corporations, or whether the goods in question are expensive or not.

If you want something, buy it. If you can't afford it, wait until you can, or do without it. Theft is not a justifiable response. It's not complicated. But some schmucks can't grasp that, it seems.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 1:46 am

Quoting Viv (Reply 42):
But some schmucks can't grasp that, it seems.

Seriously. I lost a lot of respect for a lot of people because of this thread.

I don't EVER want to see any of you schmucks whining about someone stealing your photo ever again, especially considering how little it cost you to make that one photo (just some bits on a computer! not even a "small plastic disk!") compared to the millions it costs to develop professional design software. It's sickening.
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:03 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
I lost a lot of respect for a lot of people because of this thread

Well, you gained mine. Have added you to my Respected Users list.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:53 am

Crikey can we have less of the drama please? Firstly no-one is claiming it not to be theft. The argument I am putting forward is that it is understandable why people do it, and it doesn't exactly make those people bad to society.
Obviously missing something....
 
CalgaryBill
Posts: 618
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 12:27 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:54 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 42):
Seriously. I lost a lot of respect for a lot of people because of this thread.

Ditto.

Quoting D L X (Reply 42):
I don't EVER want to see any of you schmucks whining about someone stealing your photo ever again...

You said it.

I'm not trying to neff here, I'm just speechless about some of the opinions being publicly expressed here. It's hard to believe that, on a site where intellectual property is the only marketed asset, people so readily support stealing other people's IP.

B
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:56 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 44):
it is understandable why people do it

Because it is easy, and because they won't be caught.

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 44):
it doesn't exactly make those people bad to society

It does. Many jobs have been lost in the recorded music industry because of illegal downloading. Certainly a drama for the workers concerned ...
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:10 am

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 45):
I'm not trying to neff here, I'm just speechless about some of the opinions being publicly expressed here. It's hard to believe that, on a site where intellectual property is the only marketed asset, people so readily support stealing other people's IP.

 checkmark 
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:13 am

Quoting Viv (Reply 46):
It does.

Then many are damned.

Quoting Viv (Reply 46):
Because it is easy, and because they won't be caught.

Yes, and because it is way too expensive to begin with.

We're going to start going around in circles now anyway, but I still see why people do it. Sorry if that offends some.

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 4647
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Editing Necessary To Get Pics Accepted?

Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:19 am

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 44):
Crikey can we have less of the drama please? Firstly no-one is claiming it not to be theft. The argument I am putting forward is that it is understandable why people do it, and it doesn't exactly make those people bad to society.

 checkmark  Agree.

Quoting Viv (Reply 46):
Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 44):
it doesn't exactly make those people bad to society

It does. Many jobs have been lost in the recorded music industry because of illegal downloading. Certainly a drama for the workers concerned ...

I don't think it does. People illegally download software/music/whatever, often without thinking or realising. I think a lot of it is done in pure ignorance, certainly not malice. I know a lot of people who indulge in these illegal activities and they really are nice, decent people who have a lot to offer the world. Many of them would stick their neck on the line for others, which to me is a quality only found in a decent person. You can't compare these 'criminals' with the likes of bank-robbers, muggers, burglers and murderers.

Robbing someone at knifepoint is evil, however I don't think you can call someone who downloads the odd record evil. The two crimes are worlds apart - it takes a far worse person to commit the former.

And like Tim, I'm not justifying it, but simply understanding why people do it.

Karl

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: wuyeah and 3 guests