Blog reader “Dan” writes to ask whether he should be concerned about “photo piracy” and other forms of unauthorized use of photographs he shares online.
I am a great admirer of your photos and I especially like reading your blog and the detailed captions you include with your photos. I also follow on occasion some of the forums on DPReview and one I found very interesting concerned the unauthorized use of photos that are posted on websites. I would like to start posting some of my images on Flickr and Facebook but have had second thoughts after reading the forum thread on photo piracy (not that anyone would find my images worth stealing of course!). Since you post photographs on a number of places on the web, I was wondering what you thought about that and whether it is even worth worrying about. Thanks very much.
Thanks for writing, Dan, and thanks for your kind words about my photography and this blog.
While I’m not an expert on all of the legal ramifications of image theft and photo sharing, I can share a few thoughts with you and other readers. I do think that it is a good idea to be thoughtful about what you share, where you share your photos, and the form in which you share them. The Internet is a very big place and a lot goes on “out there” that you and I may not know about or understand and which we cannot control. Once a photograph is out in the wild, wild west of the Internet, it can take on a life of its own. There are risks, and some of them are impossible to completely control.
However, there is also a lot of potential value in having your work seen. This could come from the simple pleasure of sharing your photographs with family and friends. It might progress to sharing your work in forums where you might get valuable (and not so valuable!) comments and criticism. It can also be a form of marketing and building your brand, especially if the photographs are part of a more substantial web and social media presence. Continue reading Reader Question: Concerned About Image Theft→
“You don’t make a photograph just with a camera. You bring to the act of photography all the pictures you have seen, the books you have read, the music you have heard, the people you have loved.” ― Ansel Adams
Lots of people like a photograph I made last September in the Sierra, an image that features a bit of cracked granite along the edge of a small lake, with its inverted form reflected in the water.
It seems pretty straightforward as an image. Rocks. Water. No trees. (Among some photographer friends of mine there is a sort of joke. One asks of another returning from a morning of photography, “What did you shoot?” The answer is always the same, “Rocks. Trees. Water.” And it is often true.) Nothing stupendous or iconic. Shooting this frame wasn’t all that complex, really. I only had to walk a short distance to get to the spot and no climbing was involved. From one side of this little lake I could look across and get a clear shot of this little scene. As I recall, I didn’t even have to change my lens. I just set up the tripod, used some relatively basic settings, aimed the camera over there, found a composition, made the shot. I’ll bet I didn’t spend more than five minutes here.
Well, OK, it wasn’t quite that easy. I had been photographing right around this spot for a few days, and while I had a general idea in my mind about a photograph containing these sorts of elements, I had undoubtedly walked past this spot a number of times without even seeing it. In my defense, the area is small and it isn’t surrounded by anything so stupendous that one’s attention would immediately be drawn to it. And this time the light was a bit special, with soft early light reflected in various ways from the surroundings. And this time the air was completely still, so the reflection was nearly perfect.
Actually this little lake is one of perhaps a half dozen or more in this little valley, a valley which is itself located within a larger group of valleys that hold dozens of such lakes. And, all told, I spent about six days wandering around this set of valleys and these lakes, making often just looking, perhaps filing an idea away for better light, and eventually making a few hundred photographs. Many of them are fine and competent photographs, but during this week only a handful rise to a higher level and perhaps only one or two rise to a significantly higher level. (I reserve the right to change my mind about a few of the others since sometimes a photograph’s potential doesn’t reveal itself right away.)
So I suppose it was a bit misleading to say that it only took five minutes to make this photograph. It actually took six days. Oh, did I mention that it also took two days on the trail to get to this spot, crossing two 11,000’+ passes and climbing one more ridge to get to this location at 11,000′? And another two days to get back out again? I guess I forgot that part. So it was actually 10 days, not just six. We lived at 11,000′ in our base-camp—oh, that’s right, we camped—and got up every morning before sunrise, went out and photographed for perhaps 3-4 hours, knocked off in the middle of the day to take care of camp business, and then went out for another 3-4 hours each evening, typically returning after dark to fix dinner.
I suppose that I should also point out that this wasn’t my first trip to this location either. Some decades earlier, on my first solo backpacking trip, I went out for two weeks, self-contained and carrying camera gear, and on about the tenth or eleventh trail day I had a bit of free time, so I left my camp at another nearby lake, thinking I would hike up into this area and make some photographs. I climbed the steep trail, at one point being surprised when a trio of big horn sheep spooked a few feet from me and the clatter of rocks roused me from my hiker’s revery. I dropped my pack and pulled up my camera, but the animals were already too far away down the rocky ridge. Yet, among the images I carry in my mind (many of which I eventually discover again in actual photographs) is the indelible memory of looking up at those three big horns right above me.
Now that I’m thinking of one earlier trip, I suppose I should acknowledge that whatever ability I have to “see” and photograph in the Sierra did not simply happen overnight, nor was it really just a matter of learning to operate a camera and find cool places. I recall the first time that I was aware than making a photograph was something more important than snapping a picture of the thing in front of me. I don’t remember exactly, but I must have been perhaps 10 or 11 years old, and I had a small camera that my father had loaned me. The family was in Yosemite and we hiked to Vernal Falls. No, I do not recall photographing that iconic subject, but I’m sure I must have. But on the way back, I distinctly recall rounding a corner of the trail and looking up and seeing a dome across the Valley—it must have been North Dome—and being struck by the form and position of the thing in ways that I can’t quite articulate. I knew that I had to make a photograph, but I also knew that I couldn’t just point the camera. I recall climbing up from the trail onto a small promontory where I saw some tree branches, and finding a spot where I could frame that dome with closer trees, and I made a photograph that felt like it wasn’t a snapshot.
And, speaking of long stories, that might well have been one of a series of influences (others included photograph books my father left lying around, including some I still own) that compelled me toward heading into the back-country on my first pack trip just before my 16th birthday. I did not know what to expect, but I found magic. The place I went on that first trip is, objectively speaking, nowhere near as spectacular as places I have since visited, but its effect on me was no less powerful. I crossed my first Sierra pass and dropped into another valley full of lakes, spending a few days there before emerging a confirmed backpacker… and eventually a cross-country skier… and for a while a climber… and through almost all of it a photographer.
Some years ago I made a game out of estimating how many days I had spent on the trail in the Sierra. I was shocked—and a bit proud!—when I figured out that by backpacking days added up to something like a year and a half. And, of course, since that time I’ve spent many more days on the trail, though I haven’t recalculated the total.
What does that have to do with this photograph? After substantial time in these places they get into your blood. What originally seemed novel and, to be honest, a bit foreign to a city kid becomes comfortable and familiar. You settle into routines of the back country. I recall that when I first began backpacking it might take a few days to really get to the point where I was “fully there” on the trail. Eventually it would take, oh, about ten minutes. And as all of these things—rocks, water, trees—became more a part of who I am they also became more a part of what and how I see. Where someone on their way to, say, Yosemite Valley might…
MORE
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more. Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
I just heard someone say that “photography makes the invisible visible.” It occurred to me that good photography can often do something even more special, namely make the visible visible.
Think about it.
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more. Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
(The following is another (more or less stream of consciousness) post that I wrote in reply to a comment I read somewhere else, in this case suggesting that photographic history implies that post-processing or manipulating photographs after the shutter has been clicked is ethically questionable and should be avoided. I’ll start with a modified version of the message I saw.)
…it is invalid to claim that Adams was a modern photoshoppe[r]…
I… recommend to every beginner to do film… to develop a better feeling for composition… The most difficult in digital is to restrict yourself to [taking] a limited number of photos… in the beginning…
…I want to leave my photos as natural looking as possible…
This is an important conversation, for the beginner and for people who have been making photographs for a long time.
When people make pronouncements about how photography is supposed to be done or has been done based on notions about what great photographers do or have done, it is important to check those notions against reality. In photography there is a frequent mantra about “no post processing” and “get it right in camera” that has been, in my view, perverted to suggest that photographs are created in certain ways that do not correspond to reality – and worse, that other photographers should adhere to these false “rules.” It obviously is important to develop an eye for composition and an ability to operate a camera, but that is most certainly not the end of it, nor is there much of any evidence to indicate that great photographers have felt that photography is limited to what happens in the camera.
Did Adams ever make a “bad” negative look good in post? That depends on what you think of as bad. I’m can’t think of photographs that were poorly composed and where post-processing compensated for this. (However, there are some negatives that were damaged in the fire at the Yosemite studio very early on, and in which the composition is affected by this. I’m pretty certain that “Monolith” was burned along its top edge, which is partly responsible for the crop with which we are familiar today.)
Adams did, by the reports that I have heard first hand from people who knew him, make a good number of banal and boring exposures. In fact, like photographers today, he made far, far more uninteresting and forgettable photographs than great ones. His famous statement about a dozen successful photographs in a year being a good crop is a partial acknowledgment of this truth about photography.
Some of Adams’ most famous, most successful, and most universally admired photographs would have been forgettable without extensive work in post. It still surprises me how many photographers don’t know this and, in fact, believe that the opposite is the case. A number of other photographers who knew and worked with him regularly point this out in their presentation on Adams. One of their favorite and most compelling examples is the iconic “Clearing Winter Storm” photograph of Yosemite Valley. There are three powerful pieces of evidence in this case: the straight prints of the negative (which has been printed by others), Adams’ own shorthand instructions for his extensive dodging and burning of the image when producing prints, and the profoundly different appearance of the print we all know, in which clouds that were almost uniformly near white become a dramatic mixture of very contrasting tones. Further, Adams made a number of exposures of this exact composition – most of which are not as spectacular – but he selected one from which to create the brilliant print in post that became so famous. Continue reading Photographic Myths and Platitudes: No Post-Processing!→
Like this:
LikeLoading...
Photographer and visual opportunist. Daily photos since 2005, plus articles, reviews, news, and ideas.
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.