Do you Tumblr? I do. HERE. I use it to try out ideas for my blogs, for the instant feedback, for the way selected images reveal much about the folks who post them, for the inspiration and mostly as a way to generate interest in my own particular taste. More than anything, I use it to promote my books. It doesn't work, as most of my fellow tumblrs seem to be as broke as me, and besides are young and I doubt they even read books much. No insult, just that they are visual, busy, involved and living their lives, but they are also, at least my followers, extremely intelligent, artistic and many with curatorial skills which would match those of the professionals.
It is a very intimate and personal forum...nothing reveals more about a person than the visual images they love and select to share. Graphics, Art, Homemade art, Photographs they have collected OR taken, some stolen from others. It is a frontier for photos. For the most part, I consider my tumblr posts outtakes. B-sides. Things I have or have found which I believe deserve sharing, but not necessarily interesting enough for me to ponder for long...but I've been convinced otherwise on occasion.
The beauty of Tumblr is that others indicate their interest or appreciation of the image by voting, by forwarding it or by responding in some way. The genius of tumblr is the instant reinforcement for your own taste. A community builds...my community probably says more about me than them, but the misfits who follow me, most of them anonymous, have my support. If they post an image which offends me (and some frequently do) I "unfollow" them. If one of my posts receives a plethora of approvals, I'll consider expanding it and put it on a blog. Above is a selection of my recent posts on Tumblr. You can follow too if you like. Many duplicate (or lead to) posts on what I consider my REAL blogs. But if you like pictures without my blathering, this could be the place for you.
Group of anonymous photographs from the collection of Jim Linderman All Tumbled at some time.
I detest Tumblr. I have had countless vintage photos of mine posted there without permission and in many cases, represented as if they belong to that person. Then, to top it off, more Tumblr people favorite them and my images are instantly spread all over the site. I have emailed Tumblr staff numerous times and luckily, they are quite professional and remove my images when asked. Regardless, I don't support a site that encourages photo theft. At least with Flickr, if you are stealing photos, they shut you down.
ReplyDeleteYes, I know. I've had things uncredited, stolen as it were, as well, many, many times...but for the most part, by far, there is an etiquette to credit the source along with the share. It is a matter of intention. If you intend to share in order to benefit, as I hope to...then giving it away is fine. I don't crib from others, nearly everything I post is either from my own collection or found in a book so old it has no copyright any longer. Once I put a watermark on a photo I posted, and someone told me "it wasn't cool" so there is an inherent theft thing going on. Here's how I look at it...the farther and wider something I own travels, the more recognizable it is and the more valuable the ORIGINAL becomes. My main problem with tumblr is that it is yet another site which creates content by having others do the work. But at least, one can credit themselves (and even embed your own website with each image...so it always comes back to you eventually. I can understand your concern 100%...but as my use of it supports my own vested interest, it is another tool out there to be exploited, and the benefits for some might outweigh the drawbacks. I've written a few folks telling them to credit my image too...they are always sheepish and complying, though one or two have said "get over it."
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy your "blathering"....
ReplyDeleteJust for the record, for Angelica or anyone else interested, by posting your images on flickr, you are transferring to Yahoo the right to use your content in any way they choose. I suggest you put a watermark on ANYTHING you post on flicker or anywhere else if you are concerned about protecting your content.
ReplyDeleteSee below from flickr/yahoo small print:
"However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:
1.
With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific Yahoo! Group to which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo! Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Yahoo! Services.
2.
With respect to photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services other than Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purpose for which such Content was submitted or made available. This license exists only for as long as you elect to continue to include such Content on the Yahoo! Services and will terminate at the time you remove or Yahoo! removes such Content from the Yahoo! Services.
3.
With respect to Content other than photos, graphics, audio or video you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services other than Yahoo! Groups, the perpetual, irrevocable and fully sublicensable license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, publicly perform and publicly display such Content (in whole or in part) and to incorporate such Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed."
I know people hate the watermarks, but for me it goes beyond simply laying ownership claim to an image. Several times I've had people contact me who were able to trace the photo back to my blog and ask permission to use the photo or tell me what the photo meant to them. So for me it's ownership and a way for people to trace back where the original came from. I know often times I've saved a photo to my desktop and later have no idea where I got it. For those people bothered by watermarks I tell them to move on. Nothing to see here.
ReplyDeleteI love the "I scanned this photo (that I did not take) or ad (that I did not make) I put it on Flickr and now, it's all over the web because people like it and they didn't give me (or some photo sharing corporation's site that I posted it to) any credit - I mean , I found it!" argument.
ReplyDeleteWell guess what? they found it too.
And putting your watermark on something you didn't create is a worse sin than someone sharing it without permission.
As long as the sites don't run ads or conduct commerce online (unlike flickr) what's the worry? If you're going to spend your time chasing down scans that you posted to flickr site and the world to see well, that's just sad.
It's happening to my stuff ALL THE TIME but I'm the idiot who made a digital copy of it and put it where people can find it. And watch out - Facebook is fast becoming a giant culprit in this.
If you're the artist add a signature, post it on your own website (or your own blog) beg people to give you credit or link back and hope the web likes it enough to show it around. Or better yet, hope no one does so you won't have to worry about it.
If you own the original, no matter if you are the creator, watermark. If someone sees the image and would actually legally like to use it, as I have had happen, there is no way for them to track down the owner without some sort of identification embedded in the image.
ReplyDeleteIf you are scanning something that has already been published, you don't own the original, don't watermark it. Just because you've scanned something doesn't mean you own anything.
But one-of-a-kind items, foolish to not have it marked in someway for people to be able to trace it back.
I agree that if you don't want images you own zipping through the net universe don't post them. And if you do post them make the resolution good enough for their screen, but lousy for reproduction.
Theft is too easily responded to with a smirk these days. And the attitude that "Well, you left your birdbath out front, of course it's going to be stolen" says more about the person stealing the birdbath or thinking it's okay to steal the birthbath than the person who put it out front for others to see. People just have crappy attitudes these days.
Far be it from me to defend Yahoo, but Anonymous above has misread the paragraph re: photos submitted to Flickr... the terms read "solely for the purpose the content was submitted..." Yahoo is covering themselves for having copyrighted material displayed on their site. No one has the right to commercially use your copyrighted material. If someone does, you have the legal right to pursue... but, good luck - unless you have money and it's worth it to you, it's a waste of time. Welcome to the digital world...
ReplyDelete