You probably don’t know that I also write for Photografr. Lately, I’ve been posting photos from among my Flickr faves there.

On Friday, I wanted to blog a photo that one of my contacts from Flickr, Andie Smith, had published. I noticed she didn’t have the “Blog This” button enabled on that photo, so I posted a simple question on the photo page,  asking if she could enable it. I assumed she might ask me why, or simply enable it.

(The “Blog This” button at Flickr allows you to post a photo directly to a blog. The benefit is that you don’t have to copy and paste any code to do it, and Flickr will also give credit to the photographer underneath the photo, automatically. The photo gets linked back to its photo page on Flickr, and there is also a link to the photographer’s photo stream embedded in the photo credit.)

Andie Smith responded with this missive (or should I call it a missile?):

“No i will not turn that on.  I find it strange that you would want to use my image with out paying usage fees for it, but you expect others to pay for yours?  if you would like to use it I’d be happy to add it to a lightbox on photosheter for you to purchase.”

I should explain that I consider myself to be a fairly conservative photographer. Indeed I do expect people to pay when they use my photos (in a commercial setting). Furthermore, I have also done my part to fight what I perceive is illegal photo usage. See these posts of mine for more details on this:

• How many of my photos were stolen?
• Flickr tightens up image security
• What the Duck on watermarks
• Stick a fork in Zooomr, they’re done (one of the reasons I left Zooomr was their poor image security, which apes what Flickr is doing, and was implemented only after many people complained)
• Condensed knowledge for 2008-02-10

But Photografr is not a commercial site. It is a blog run by photographers, it has no ads, nor is it making anyone any money, and its sole purpose is to showcase beautiful photographs. Credit is always given to the photographer, and the photos always link back to the originals on Flickr.

I should also say that Andie Smith watermarks her photos. Her watermark is very large when compared to other watermarks (including mine), so there’s no possibility whatsoever of not knowing who takes her photos when you look at them.

Suffice it to say that the tone of the email disturbed me. Here was one of my contacts, whom I’d known (at Flickr) for about a year, and whose photographs I’d faved and commented on, and NEVER misused, barking at me and treating me as if I’d stolen one of her photos already. I expected better.

I wanted to reply to her and explain myself, but guess what, she blocked me on Flickr. And she did that after I asked her a simple question! If she had simply replied to me, I’d have respected her decision and moved on. But to block me after I had done nothing wrong pushed me over the edge. When a person has such disrespect for someone else, their behavior deserves to be castigated.

I decided to reply to her anyway. I couldn’t do it on Flickr, so I had to dig up her personal email address (from her site) and write to that address. Here’s what I said:

“Andie,

You completely misunderstand me. There are many ways to use an image. If someone uses one of my images on a blog, and gives me full credit for my work, and what’s more, links back to that same image on Flickr, so others can find more of my work, I consider that free advertising. That’s the way I intended to to use one of your photos. I wanted to post it to photografr.com, which is site where great photographs are highlighted.

Perhaps our definitions of how photos get used differ, and you have your own way of looking at it. Fine, let’s drop the subject altogether.

Furthermore, I take offense at being blocked on Flickr, simply for asking you a question. That’s akin to “shoot first, ask questions later”, especially after we’ve been contacts for so long, and my enjoyment of your photographs has been without reproach — I have not misused a single one of your photographs.

If that’s the way you look at human relationships, so be it.”

I gave her till today to perhaps cool her heels and answer (about 18 hours). She didn’t. She sure was fast on the trigger to block me (she did it within 15 minutes of me posting the comment), but she didn’t have enough respect for me to reply to my email.

So, what are my reasons for writing this post?

1. I believe this sort of behavior is not right and needs to be exposed. If I ever did something like this to someone, please accept my apologies right now. I do not want to be that sort of a person. It’s just not right to treat people like this, especially when you already know them and have established a rapport of sorts with them. Let me make it clear I’m not attacking the way she feels about photo usage. If she thinks everyone should pay to use her photos, no matter what, so be it. Had she replied to me and left it at that, I’d have respected her decision and moved on. But to block someone for simply asking a question is erratic at best. I think it’s a failure at basic human interaction.
2. People who fight for photographers’ rights have widely varying opinions. If you know of someone who wants to stand up for photo usage rights, don’t assume right away he or she is an extremist who wants everyone to pay for everything. Take the time to know where they stand on the issue. For example, I thought my own stance on photo usage was toward the extreme of the spectrum, but as it turns out, I’m more balanced than that. That’s good to know.
3. My interaction with her has forced me to re-evaluate my stance on photo usage, and to re-word my photo usage terms. See my Flickr profile and my photo usage page here on my site for the updated terms, which are also discussed below.

Basically, I will allow anyone to use any of my photos at a size of up to 800 pixels wide, on a non-commercial site like a blog, for free, without asking my permission, as long as:

1. They keep my watermark on the photo
2. Give me credit by name (Raoul Pop)
3. Link back to my site (raoulpop.com) or to the Flickr photo page where they obtained the photo

As it turns out, Flickr’s own “Blog This” button already does this, and it’s already enabled on all my photos. So, if you see a photo of mine that you like, use it to your heart’s content on your personal site or blog. You won’t have to pay me anything, and you won’t have to ask my permission.

However, if you’re a commercial entity or site, and you derive some kind of income or revenue from the content/photos that you deliver or produce, please contact me first to make arrangements and to obtain the image at a higher resolution, without the watermark. My pricing is flexible, and I’ll do what I can to make the deal happen.

Hope this helps clarify things a little.

Updated 8/3/08: You know, I promised myself I would move on after writing this post, but I can’t resist posting a recent email conversation with Andie Smith. She wrote to me after posting her comment below, and I have a pretty good hunch that she passed around the link to my post to her “fans”, who’ve been jumping at me and trying to bite. I haven’t let their comments go through the live site, because I consider them rude. Draw your own conclusion from the email exchange quoted below.

Andie Smith writes (5:58 PM). Notice how she tries to turn things around:

“wow!  all i can say is wow!   I’m upset by your blog post.  why?  Well for one…you gave less than 24 hours to answer an e-mail on a weekend.

And then she writes a few minutes later (6:06 PM):

My response was (7:32 PM):

And (this is the best part), here’s her reply to my message (7:59 PM). This message made it pretty clear in my mind that I was right when I wrote this post:

Oh Andie, I think your “meanings” came through quite clear on that last email. I certainly don’t want anything more to do with you. Call off your doggies while you’re at it, because their comments aren’t going to make it to the live site. Kthxbye.

(6 votes, average: 4.67 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Follow my posts. It's easy and free.