Question for UB/Don/Spie

Status
Not open for further replies.
Has something been said then Raymond? Is the concern that it might be seen as an advertisement for a Wedding Photographer's business?
 
Oh a I wish someone would get a grip with this, surely this is just showing what you've done, sharing it with others; I for one look forward to them and make me wish I was that good and give me some drive to do it.

OK, so we toned down on self-advertising in signatures but if things like this get banned then this forum becomes full of numpties who know nothing. If it is about self-advertising again then it doesn't take much just to go over to TP or search on google.

/tired Monday rant over
 
feriso said:
Oh a I wish someone would get a grip with this, surely this is just showing what you've done, sharing it with others; I for one look forward to them and make me wish I was that good and give me some drive to do it.

OK, so we toned down on self-advertising in signatures but if things like this get banned then this forum becomes full of numpties who know nothing. If it is about self-advertising again then it doesn't take much just to go over to TP or search on google.

/tired Monday rant over
Click to expand...

This to be honest.

A photography forum where we cannot post pictur.....wait....
 
So now some of the people who do photography for a living can't show some of the photo's they have took? Laughable.

I have not seen one single tog touting for business on here, all I have seen are superb pictures being shared for fellow togs to appreciate.

May as well shut this section of the forum now if its going to be moderated in this way.
 
It's the "No promotion of business interests" thing isn't it? I guess as long as there is no link to a business site (including hosting and watermarks) then there is nothing to worry about?
 
I, like most people who like a particular persons photos will normally Google his/her name/site for inspiration, tips & knowledge.

Exactley the same principles apply to all items OCUK sell, everyone searches elsewhere for price comparisons.

It would be a great loss for this forum and OCUK if people like Raymond were to post elsewhere.

In my opinion he has not promoted his business interests. Let's hope common sense prevails.

Regards,
GJC
 
Would be very regrettable if the pros/semi-pros had to refrain from posting, it’s their inspiration/advice/help that helps us amateurs/hobbyists learn/improve.
 
jeez, with the amount of photos in this section with watermarks to personal websites you may as well take the whole lot down and we'll all go over to Talk Photography forums..

rubbish use of the no self promo rule in my opinion. at no point has there been any touting for business. the weddings threads were excellent inspiration not just for weddings but portrait work too.
 
Andrew Moore said:
Yes

Watermarked images however are border line and any tie to a business with said images is also not allowed.

Its classed as self promoting.
Click to expand...

How can professional photographers protect their images then?

I assume that every ones website that is listed in the sticky list will be removed?
 
I understand the reason for the rule, but a watermark is often the best way to protect their work from theft. Removing the right to use it would limit us from seeing some of their best shots. When you said they were borderline, is there any clarification beyond that? For instance, it must be a generic watermark as opposed to their own? Or just that it shouldn't be over the top?
 
Andrew Moore said:
Yes

Watermarked images however are border line and any tie to a business with said images is also not allowed.

Its classed as self promoting.
Click to expand...

So I got a 3 days suspension for having my name on my photographs? It is the same as my user name, it is not a website .co.uk address. The same watermark that I have been using for the past 3+ years.

And not to be "stirring the pot". How is the othe thread re "my company won wedding video photography of the year" not be self promoting?
 
Last edited:
Use a watermark which isn't affiliated to your business but still protects your work....? I'm not sure how far you want to go though as you can view exif info.
 
sbi5ar said:
How can professional photographers protect their images then?

I assume that every ones website that is listed in the sticky list will be removed?
Click to expand...

It's not rocket-science, from my reading of AM's pronouncement...

Instead of Joe Bloggs Photography, one would simply have Joe Bloggs DD/MM/YYYY - no direct link to a business/company.

Which is - where I suspect - the notion of "borderline" creeps in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom