Photography

Here are a couple that looks good, no installation needed.

http://www.pendriveapps.com/steganography-and-watermarking-openpuff/
http://www.pendriveapps.com/hide-data-inside-an-image-steganog/

On 01-Mar-2012 5:34 AM, jimpickerell wrote:

 

One of the problems with putting metadata in the IPTC header is that it can easily be edited out. On the other hand, I have been told that the camera identifier cannot be edited out of the Exif file. Can anyone confirm if that is true?

If that is true, it should be possible to include the camera serial number as non-editable in Exif as well. I assume that when GPS data is stored with an image it cannot be edited, otherwise it would be worthless. Is that the case?

If the camera serial number and date taken could not be removed or edited from a file then a photographer could register a particular camera with the copyright office. Anything taken with that camera after the registration date would be his creation. If the photographer sells the camera then the new owner could register the same serial number with a new beginning date.

Obviously, this could greatly simplify the whole copyright registration process and still provide a firm identification of the copyright holder from a legal point of view. It would require legislation, but might be something worth pursuing if it is technically possible.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (3)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 2

You can edit any such standard information inside a picture, full stop, remove it or replace it.

There is a method though that can be used, that is almost impossible to alter, it is really and encryption methodology called steganography.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography
http://www.jjtc.com/Steganography/
http://www.tucows.com/preview/504645

In other words, you hide data, information, inside the picture, making small subtle changes to the digital information that can not be spotted by the eye. The technology is so "safe" that even CIA is tearing out its hair over it, leaving copyright theft aside.

There are many free programs available on the web to do it.

http://www.tucows.com/preview/504645
http://download.cnet.com/Xiao-Steganography/3000-2092_4-10541494.html
http://www.prospector.cz/Freeware/Utilities/Security/Steganography/
http://quickcrypto.com/free-steganography-software.html
http://www.jjtc.com/Steganography/tools.html

The last site lists 107 programs.

To take it one step further, you could embed a random "serial number" using either a PGP/GPG key or a password generator inside the picture.

Try this

http://www.password-generator.com/free.html
http://download.cnet.com/Free-Password-Generator/3000-2064_4-10559877.html



On 01-Mar-2012 5:34 AM, jimpickerell wrote:

 

One of the problems with putting metadata in the IPTC header is that it can easily be edited out. On the other hand, I have been told that the camera identifier cannot be edited out of the Exif file. Can anyone confirm if that is true?

If that is true, it should be possible to include the camera serial number as non-editable in Exif as well. I assume that when GPS data is stored with an image it cannot be edited, otherwise it would be worthless. Is that the case?

If the camera serial number and date taken could not be removed or edited from a file then a photographer could register a particular camera with the copyright office. Anything taken with that camera after the registration date would be his creation. If the photographer sells the camera then the new owner could register the same serial number with a new beginning date.

Obviously, this could greatly simplify the whole copyright registration process and still provide a firm identification of the copyright holder from a legal point of view. It would require legislation, but might be something worth pursuing if it is technically possible.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (2)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 2

Yes and no.

The liking sits in the html code used in web pages. If the picture, including the code, is displayed in a program that can handle html code, yes - it will work. Such programs are most browsers and programs like word-processors or many PDF programs.

If the picture is lifted out of the html code environment, for instance if you right click and go save in a browser, the code is lost and there is no way to retain the linking. The only way is to write the link like www.somewhere.com and user has to type that into the browser.

Most people would save a picture as a JPG, PNG, or in a similar format, and it is not possible to have a link in such formats.

Looking at a picture on the web, as in a photo-site, yes it is possible and very easy, but as said, if someone download the picture in a picture format, and include it in another site, the link is lost.

Hope it helps.

On 01-Mar-2012 5:22 AM, jimpickerell wrote:

 

Does anyone know if it is technically possible to embed a small visible watermark in the bottom corner of a photo that would also be a hot link to a web site? What I would like to see is a watermark that could be clicked on and would reveal either a code or contact information for the creator.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (2)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 2

One of the problems with putting metadata in the IPTC header is that it can easily be edited out. On the other hand, I have been told that the camera identifier cannot be edited out of the Exif file. Can anyone confirm if that is true?

If that is true, it should be possible to include the camera serial number as non-editable in Exif as well. I assume that when GPS data is stored with an image it cannot be edited, otherwise it would be worthless. Is that the case?

If the camera serial number and date taken could not be removed or edited from a file then a photographer could register a particular camera with the copyright office. Anything taken with that camera after the registration date would be his creation. If the photographer sells the camera then the new owner could register the same serial number with a new beginning date.

Obviously, this could greatly simplify the whole copyright registration process and still provide a firm identification of the copyright holder from a legal point of view. It would require legislation, but might be something worth pursuing if it is technically possible.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 4

Does anyone know if it is technically possible to embed a small visible watermark in the bottom corner of a photo that would also be a hot link to a web site? What I would like to see is a watermark that could be clicked on and would reveal either a code or contact information for the creator.

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 4

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/artshow_photo/message/58975;_ylc=X3oDMTJyNXRpMGgyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzkyNDI1NTMEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDE5MDU4BG1zZ0lkAzU4OTc1BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEzMzAxNjQyMDQ->
Hello,

You can copyright a series of images or a whole book of images at one time
instead of individually for a single fee. Just follow the rules from the
Copyright Office. http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl124.html

If you're doing gallery wrapped canvas sign on the bottom or the back if
you do not want to sign in the image area. I sign with an archival pen
before I put the coating on and stretch the canvas.

Matted prints I sign in the prints border or image area and I sign the mat.
There is no hard rule not to sign in the image area or only sign on the
back.

Wherever you sign use an archival ink or #2 pencil. I found archival acid
free pens at Office depot in black ink, silver and gold inks. I use the
silver/gold when I sign a print or canvas in the image area or wrapped
canvas area that is black or dark.

Re: question??? asking for advice
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/artshow_photo/message/58975;_ylc=X3oDMTJyNXRpMGgyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzkyNDI1NTMEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDE5MDU4BG1zZ0lkAzU4OTc1BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEzMzAxNjQyMDQ->
Posted
by: "terri pakula" t.tweetytiel@verizon.net
<t.tweetytiel@verizon.net?Subject=+Re%3A%20question%3F%3F%3F%20asking%20for%20advice>
terrilynn11557
<http://profiles.yahoo.com/terrilynn11557> Fri Feb 24, 2012 5:48 am (PST)

Hi VR,
Is this an outdoor show or gallery exhibit? Either way I am
confused...how are they presented? As canvas prints or matts and
framed? How is there no print area? Are these massed produced by a
printer?
That information would help me see if you can put the © and your name
on it....
Either way the BEST WAY and it is time consuming is to register all
your work with the copyright office....Have a notice that is visible
that it is illegal to copy the image or use it in anyway without your
written permission. You are not selling the copyright but selling them
the image....

--
Sálongo Lee
Sálongo's Art, LLC
http://salongosart.com
Natchez Studio: 601.620.0569

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

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (3)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 7

Donate to support the ArtShowPhoto Forum at
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm

PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.

If you want to advertise services related to art shows or photography, either in a forum post or on the resource web site, please contact the forum owner for permission.

Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com 

Hi VR,
Is this an outdoor show or gallery exhibit? Either way I am
confused...how are they presented? As canvas prints or matts and
framed? How is there no print area? Are these massed produced by a
printer?
That information would help me see if you can put the © and your name
on it....
Either way the BEST WAY and it is time consuming is to register all
your work with the copyright office....Have a notice that is visible
that it is illegal to copy the image or use it in anyway without your
written permission. You are not selling the copyright but selling them
the image....

Some photographers sign their images....(I find it very obtrusive to
the image)...some will sign it on the back (use archival ink if your
print is archival)...or there is some white border on the front to
sign in........Many photolabs will not make copies of a print and say
it is illegal....I have heard that....

Terri

"I have a show coming up and I was wondering how you protect your
photos from being copied. How do you copyright your photos if you do
not have your own printing area or logo on the back of the photo? Can
they be protected? How? Thanks for any advice. VR

http://terri-pakula.artistwebsites.com
terripakula.com
terripakula.zenfolio.com
http://terripakula.blogspot.com

"A Parrot doesn't scream to make noise,
but because he has something to say.
Do we listen?"

t.tweetytiel@verizon.net

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

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (2)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Donate to support the ArtShowPhoto Forum at
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm

PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.

If you want to advertise services related to art shows or photography, either in a forum post or on the resource web site, please contact the forum owner for permission.

Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com 

I have a show coming up and I was wondering how you protect your photos from being copied. How do you copyright your photos if you do not have your own printing area or logo on the back of the photo? Can they be protected? How? Thanks for any advice. VR

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Donate to support the ArtShowPhoto Forum at
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm

PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.

If you want to advertise services related to art shows or photography, either in a forum post or on the resource web site, please contact the forum owner for permission.

Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com 

some cameras could handle bulk film. On my koni rapid omega I can just carry a sack of loaded backs.
smitty

On 2/22/2012 10:50 PM, RK wrote:

 

Sure, but you had to change the film or cassette after 36 pictures, but I think there were some cassettes, camera backs, too that you could load with movie film and get a few hundred pictures in one swoop, and you had to change the battery in the motor-drive. I just took a look at my Canon 5DMk2 to see how many pictures I can get on a "roll of memory", but the counter don't go to more than 999.

Throw enough stuff on the wall, sure, I think that is what many of the real young ones do today, close the eyes, push the button and see what the camera happens to catch.

Isn't technology wonderful. Just a pity you have to be there and have a camera, but maybe that changes too. :-)

On 23-Feb-2012 12:37 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I'm a young 65. A guy could "Kodak" a moving horse with a view camera but for stop action motor sport shooting when vehicles are going well over 100 mph I need a little more technology. When I'm getting paid the client will not except excuses. I had would use 2 cameras each with 36 frames. Ya know the old saying, if ya throw enough stuff on the wall some of it will stick :-)


On 2/22/2012 10:23 PM, RK wrote:

 

Feels like you are a very young man Smitty :-)

Try changing 36 glass plates in one minute :-)

If you wanted really good photos, that is what you had to use.

On 23-Feb-2012 12:10 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I had auto winders on my film cameras. I could rip off 36 shots in less than a minute :-)
smitty


On 2/13/2012 10:45 PM, RK wrote:

 

Interesting video. Makes me remember the  "old days" when we did not have the "push the button" "rapid fire" fully automatic cameras. We simply had to learn to choose the right film, to hit the trigger in exactly the right spit second to with one picture catch the motion, and we became quite good.

When I took photos of a rider and horse flying over a jump in a competition, and you had to take it exactly when the front hooves were right over the bar, plus minus five inches, you only had once chance in a lifetime to get just that photo, and you nearly always did it.

Now we can set up the camera, and ask a 5 year old or a "monkey" to take the picture, with the same result.

This is why photography has degenerated as it has, and why we have to find new ways of making a living with photography.

Just my 5c views.


On 13-Feb-2012 10:25 AM, Doni wrote:

 

Dear all,

 

We Highly recommend this resource to any photographer who needs to master splash photography technique

http://doni-photography.blogspot.com/2012/02/splash-photography-technique-no-flash.html

 

regards

 

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (12)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Sure, but you had to change the film or cassette after 36 pictures, but I think there were some cassettes, camera backs, too that you could load with movie film and get a few hundred pictures in one swoop, and you had to change the battery in the motor-drive. I just took a look at my Canon 5DMk2 to see how many pictures I can get on a "roll of memory", but the counter don't go to more than 999.

Throw enough stuff on the wall, sure, I think that is what many of the real young ones do today, close the eyes, push the button and see what the camera happens to catch.

Isn't technology wonderful. Just a pity you have to be there and have a camera, but maybe that changes too. :-)

On 23-Feb-2012 12:37 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I'm a young 65. A guy could "Kodak" a moving horse with a view camera but for stop action motor sport shooting when vehicles are going well over 100 mph I need a little more technology. When I'm getting paid the client will not except excuses. I had would use 2 cameras each with 36 frames. Ya know the old saying, if ya throw enough stuff on the wall some of it will stick :-)


On 2/22/2012 10:23 PM, RK wrote:

 

Feels like you are a very young man Smitty :-)

Try changing 36 glass plates in one minute :-)

If you wanted really good photos, that is what you had to use.

On 23-Feb-2012 12:10 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I had auto winders on my film cameras. I could rip off 36 shots in less than a minute :-)
smitty


On 2/13/2012 10:45 PM, RK wrote:

 

Interesting video. Makes me remember the  "old days" when we did not have the "push the button" "rapid fire" fully automatic cameras. We simply had to learn to choose the right film, to hit the trigger in exactly the right spit second to with one picture catch the motion, and we became quite good.

When I took photos of a rider and horse flying over a jump in a competition, and you had to take it exactly when the front hooves were right over the bar, plus minus five inches, you only had once chance in a lifetime to get just that photo, and you nearly always did it.

Now we can set up the camera, and ask a 5 year old or a "monkey" to take the picture, with the same result.

This is why photography has degenerated as it has, and why we have to find new ways of making a living with photography.

Just my 5c views.


On 13-Feb-2012 10:25 AM, Doni wrote:

 

Dear all,

 

We Highly recommend this resource to any photographer who needs to master splash photography technique

http://doni-photography.blogspot.com/2012/02/splash-photography-technique-no-flash.html

 

regards

 

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (11)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

I'm a young 65. A guy could "Kodak" a moving horse with a view camera but for stop action motor sport shooting when vehicles are going well over 100 mph I need a little more technology. When I'm getting paid the client will not except excuses. I had would use 2 cameras each with 36 frames. Ya know the old saying, if ya throw enough stuff on the wall some of it will stick :-)


On 2/22/2012 10:23 PM, RK wrote:

 

Feels like you are a very young man Smitty :-)

Try changing 36 glass plates in one minute :-)

If you wanted really good photos, that is what you had to use.

On 23-Feb-2012 12:10 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I had auto winders on my film cameras. I could rip off 36 shots in less than a minute :-)
smitty


On 2/13/2012 10:45 PM, RK wrote:

 

Interesting video. Makes me remember the  "old days" when we did not have the "push the button" "rapid fire" fully automatic cameras. We simply had to learn to choose the right film, to hit the trigger in exactly the right spit second to with one picture catch the motion, and we became quite good.

When I took photos of a rider and horse flying over a jump in a competition, and you had to take it exactly when the front hooves were right over the bar, plus minus five inches, you only had once chance in a lifetime to get just that photo, and you nearly always did it.

Now we can set up the camera, and ask a 5 year old or a "monkey" to take the picture, with the same result.

This is why photography has degenerated as it has, and why we have to find new ways of making a living with photography.

Just my 5c views.


On 13-Feb-2012 10:25 AM, Doni wrote:

 

Dear all,

 

We Highly recommend this resource to any photographer who needs to master splash photography technique

http://doni-photography.blogspot.com/2012/02/splash-photography-technique-no-flash.html

 

regards

 

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (10)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

Feels like you are a very young man Smitty :-)

Try changing 36 glass plates in one minute :-)

If you wanted really good photos, that is what you had to use.

On 23-Feb-2012 12:10 PM, Denny "Smitty' Schmidt wrote:

 

I had auto winders on my film cameras. I could rip off 36 shots in less than a minute :-)
smitty


On 2/13/2012 10:45 PM, RK wrote:

 

Interesting video. Makes me remember the  "old days" when we did not have the "push the button" "rapid fire" fully automatic cameras. We simply had to learn to choose the right film, to hit the trigger in exactly the right spit second to with one picture catch the motion, and we became quite good.

When I took photos of a rider and horse flying over a jump in a competition, and you had to take it exactly when the front hooves were right over the bar, plus minus five inches, you only had once chance in a lifetime to get just that photo, and you nearly always did it.

Now we can set up the camera, and ask a 5 year old or a "monkey" to take the picture, with the same result.

This is why photography has degenerated as it has, and why we have to find new ways of making a living with photography.

Just my 5c views.


On 13-Feb-2012 10:25 AM, Doni wrote:

 

Dear all,

 

We Highly recommend this resource to any photographer who needs to master splash photography technique

http://doni-photography.blogspot.com/2012/02/splash-photography-technique-no-flash.html

 

regards

 

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (9)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5

I had auto winders on my film cameras. I could rip off 36 shots in less than a minute :-)
smitty


On 2/13/2012 10:45 PM, RK wrote:

 

Interesting video. Makes me remember the  "old days" when we did not have the "push the button" "rapid fire" fully automatic cameras. We simply had to learn to choose the right film, to hit the trigger in exactly the right spit second to with one picture catch the motion, and we became quite good.

When I took photos of a rider and horse flying over a jump in a competition, and you had to take it exactly when the front hooves were right over the bar, plus minus five inches, you only had once chance in a lifetime to get just that photo, and you nearly always did it.

Now we can set up the camera, and ask a 5 year old or a "monkey" to take the picture, with the same result.

This is why photography has degenerated as it has, and why we have to find new ways of making a living with photography.

Just my 5c views.


On 13-Feb-2012 10:25 AM, Doni wrote:

 

Dear all,

 

We Highly recommend this resource to any photographer who needs to master splash photography technique

http://doni-photography.blogspot.com/2012/02/splash-photography-technique-no-flash.html

 

regards

 

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (8)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 5