Discussion in 'photography, graphics & art' started by editor, Feb 13, 2017.
Man, I get annoyed when people use my pics, but I think this guy takes it all a bit far:
What a dick
Fucking hell! Is someone keeping an eye on this guy? Is there anything she can do to protect herself?
Poor woman: steals a memory card, uploads the stolen photos to her website with her watermark on it - and then gets caught and confronted about it.
Seems we've reached a situation where appropriation of other people's property for use on the internet is so common, that more people sympathize with the thief than the victim. If she had stolen his expensive Nikon camera, for instance, there would be an easy remedy if the theft could be proven. There is no easy remedy with internet appropriation; so it isn't that surprising to see people getting frustrated to the point that they do something like this.
Firstly, we are only told one side of the story.
Secondly, there are other channels to pursue for recourse.
Thirdly, the guy is obviously some sort of psycho.
Fourthly, the photographs are shit and worthless anyway.
Fifthly, she has not in anyway profited from use of a presumably 'found' memory card full of snaps.
At the very worse, she has lied. Was there any attempt to contact her before flying all the way to SA? Who knows? It is a very expensive, and very long trip from Brighton, UK.
He looks a bit like that Vincent Tabak bloke...
So theft is alright as long as the victim is a bit 'weird'?
I wonder if he gave any money to the people in the photos.
He's not as weird as some of the banned users from here who just can't stop themselves from returning.
It isn't proven theft. That is just his take.
Of course he didn't. He was helping them on his humanitarian, not for profit, safari holiday. Probably teaching them all about the good practice of ways in the developed world for his right to seek fortune as an outstanding digital shooter. He probably fell in love with someone a little more wise than he is himself.
Well, it sure looks like it. His memory card vanishes and then the images on it appear on her website....
Not that it excuses his obsessive behaviour though.
Do you give people money who appear in your holiday pics then?
Not so sure myself. If she was a thief, she would probably have taken the camera and gear also.
Let's assume (just by way of example) they were travelling together, taking very similar photographs of the same subject matter. Not inconceivable that you could mix up your memory cards and assume they were your photographs some weeks later. It happens.
Except that's not what happened because she used photos that he took in a different place - somewhere she didn't visit.
Not sure about you, but there's no fucking way on earth I'd 'mix up' my photos with someone else's.
I'm on her side by the end of that video
We only have his side of the story. Very unfair. Plus, his extreme actions tend to lean me on the side of caution about believing his entire story. However, even if true (that she didn't visit certain places) it is far from impossible he left his card somewhere. She found it. Used it to big herself up, or whatever. It is no big crime.
And, no - as a photographer, and lover of photography as a recording of my reality, I would never 'mix' my storage, or camera with anybody else. Nobody other than a trusted output professional would be allowed to touch it. The guy was a bit careless it seems.
You mix up memory cards, but never mind, the one you ended up with has some pics on so you can put them online for your friends to see. A shame you don't have the contact details for the guy who owns it so you can arrange a swap and see if he has yours. A few weeks later the owner of the card flies half way round the world and unannounced, accosts you in your residence and accuses you of theft.
You're missing the point. I'm very confident that I would never mistake a whole memory stick's worth of photos as being mine if I didn't take the pictures on it. No way at all.
I'm no entirely sure how you might 'mix up' memory cards with a complete stranger. No one gets near my memory cards. Why should they?
*this isn't to excuse the guy's weird behaviour, mind
Of course she nicked it. She's a dick. He just happens to be more of one. I just think it's pretty funny the cops couldn't be arsed turning up, in one of the more dangerous and crime ridden cities in the world, to track down an English backpackers holiday snaps of wildebeest and giraffe. After the dickhead who took them shelled out £700 or so to go and retrieve it
With all due respect, I think you are missing my point.
The likes of you, or myself, or the guy in question would not mistake an entire memory cards worth of photographs as their own. An average holiday snapper (without wishing to sound derogatory) who has travelled the same route at the time would IMO, be forgiven for mistaking the content of a memory card as their own. Not everyone takes the time to consider all we see through a viewfinder and the way it may appear when we get home. Most simply 'point and shoot' without even looking.
I don't take snaps of people I don't know.
Really. So how does that work when you take a beach shot? Or a photo in a busy street, or a sports event, or anywhere where there's likely to be people in the background? Or do you wait until everyone has cleared off?
Nah. The guy was a pro. To suggest that some point and shooter would suddenly think, "hey, my crappy shitty camera took all these amazing, perfectly exposed photos - including some of places I've never ever been - but they must be mine" is sheer fantasy.
I knew you were going to say that. As you well understood, I meant that I don't take face on personal photos of people I don't know.
Why are you trying to pick a fight with me.
ETA Because I am a point and shooter with a crappy shitty camera.
No. It's because insisting that photographers should pay people who appear in their photos is a very, very dodgy argument indeed. How much of a face should appear in a photo before they have to get paid? How much should they get paid? What if you capture a cop breaking the law - would you have to pay him too? Such a policy would kill street photography altogether.
And this isn't personal, btw, but I'll always argue strongly against anyone proposing that the photography I love - and which plays an important part in documenting the world and sometimes bringing bad people and malpractices to justice - should effectively be banned,while the state is free to CCTV our every move.
I'm not insisting, am I.
I just find it an odd juxtaposition that the photographer here feels so affronted by having his images used by someone else, whilst apparently not feeling urge to recognise the people in his snaps actual physical lived experience, whether that be by naming them (the very least he could do) or supporting their community, or indeed giving them something material.
In that little film did he make mention of them AT ALL?
yeah yeah, how do we know he didn't already do that. He would have mentioned it somewhere in his story if he had done so, wouldn't he.
If a photojournalist came to Brixton and took loads of snaps of local people going about their business and then got cross that someone had taken his photo credits, but he never even mentioned where or what he'd been snapping, the context or any part of the story at all... would that not rile you just the smallest bit?
And where have I said I'd ban anything. ffs
And just in case it need saying, I hate CCTV, of course I do.
They don't look very professional.
Separate names with a comma.