Stop Using Instagram

[Sith Zombie]

Good post/information dr croubie

I might be wrong, but I can't see them getting away with this long term....people that produce good photos WILL stop using them, and instagram will be left with poor quality/uninteresting amateur point and shoot and mobile phone shots.

Not so. Instagram KNOWS that the average person will not change their habits.
...and Instagram was just bought by Facebook.
I know I am in the minority....but I would NEVER have a Facebook page.  The reasons are just too many to list....WAY too many. It's just not a safe or very intelligent thing to do. Truly.

I had a Facebook page about 3 years ago but canceled it. I can see the value in it sometimes but I survived a long time before facebook arrived and hopefully will still be doing so after it has gone.

[distant.star]

I know I am in the minority....but I would NEVER have a Facebook page.  The reasons are just too many to list....WAY too many. It's just not a safe or very intelligent thing to do. Truly.

Safe? Intelligent? Aren't you the guy who took a photo walk on the Jersey shore during the worst hurricane NJ ever had?

Just kidding, Bob!! I know you're smart about everything you do, and those hurricane pictures are still the best I've seen anyone take regarding that disaster.

This Instagram thing has me puzzled. They certainly have a right to change their policy (and I and everyone else have the right not to participate), but they must think two things:

1. Most Instagram users won't care and will even be flattered that some corporate entity is using their images. "Wow, dude, Frito-Lay is using one of my snaps in their TV commercial -- awesome!"

2. The quality of photography has fallen to a level that any kind of junk is now acceptable.

This is really huge news. I'll be watching to see what happens. If there is no mass rebellion, it spells real trouble in the world of image ownership.

[RustyTheGeek]

Why the big uproar?! In the current economic climate I think it's a good thing that a small local business like Facebook will buy instagram and make a good use of all these photos. They can then sell the photos to other poor companies that cant afford to hire a photographer. Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress in this period in history!

You are joking right?

Yeah I'm joking, did the montypython quote not give it away? I guess if you don't know the quote, then you don't know it. No harm done

ok, funny, i haven't seen montypython in years.

LOL!!  Oh that's rich!  I was just about to post to Northstar to re-read it!  (I was gonna say, "Come On Northstar!!  How could you miss that!?")

IMHO - Anyone who spends more than $100 on a camera these days and decides to upload content online should not be so naive as to think that 90% of the places the photos go will not be collection bins for free content to the provider where all of their rights will be stripped away.  Really.  It's no secret and hasn't been for years.  It's really pretty simple... Either pay for a respected service like Zenfolio or SmugMug, et al. and protect your rights or use free services and lose your image rights.  Simple choice if you ask me.  It's not like the paid services really cost that much either.  $50 a year?  Big whoop.

Here's my Zenfolio Referral Code if you decide to buy Zenfolio...
https://secure.zenfolio.com/zf/signup/plans.aspx
6KC-FPW-PWR

I just read this story (below) and planned to post a warning on CR but the OP beat me to it.  I don't use any of these online services to post images myself except to share the occasional phone pic or family photo but if I did, I would assume they were going to eventually be shared with the world without my permission.  That's just the reality of it.

http://www.zdnet.com/so-instagram-can-now-sell-your-photos-get-over-it-7000008960/

[RustyTheGeek]

BTW - the point that the article I link to makes is that the lion's share of the photos on instagram are...

"... grainy, dark, fuzzy out of focus images ..." and " Let it sort through the millions of family, pet, ‘action’ and party photos to find a great image with good composition, framing and colour." and " ... your bar room drunken cell phone uploads will never quite make the grade ...".

The point the columnist makes is there are 5 billion photos to sort through and most of them are crap.

Unfortunately, I agree with distant.star in that the majority of people now have a very low standard for what is considered an acceptable image.  It's pretty sad.  Makes me wonder why I care so much sometimes.

[Beautor]

Taking the copyrights to any images posted has been Facebook's policy for at least 4 years now, and when they bought Instagram they obviously implemented the policy there too. One more reason why I hate Facebook and refuse to post any images on one of their services.

Flickr does not assume any rights to your images. They were quite explicit on that when I signed up for my Flickr account. I'm pretty sure that Google's products do not assume any rights to your images either, but I don't use them so I'm not certain.

[IslanderMV]

Facebook legal double speak: (http://www.facebook.com/legal/terms)

2. Sharing Your Content and Information

You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings. In addition:

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

[tron]

No Facebook, No Twitter, No Flickr, No instagram, etc...   

I have posted a picture on this site once. That's all.

My pictures are held in many ... local backups.

[RLPhoto]

Crap, and I was just starting to like instagram.

As a Istock contributor, IMO, Most crap cell phone photos won't print,look, or sell as well as good stock photos.

[Shawn L]

I thought this was an interesting quote about Facebook and its ilk:

If You're Not Paying For It, You Become The Product

More info here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/marketshare/2012/03/05/if-youre-not-paying-for-it-you-become-the-product/

Shawn L.

[RustyTheGeek]

Crap, and I was just starting to like instagram.

As a Istock contributor, IMO, Most crap cell phone photos won't print,look, or sell as well as good stock photos.

Unless that is the look that is needed.  Or the image is significant for other reasons, newsworthy or specifically desirable.

Years ago, I got a Zenfolio account specifically to control my images because I didn't want our Boy Scout images in the public domain or ending up on a billboard, cereal box or hiking advertisement without permission.  I educated myself on the subject so others wouldn't be adversely affected by my ignorance.  Money well spent.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Flickr lets you assign controls and copyright restrictions to your images.  For a free service, they are pretty clear on user rights.  A small German business making horse and goat cheese asked to lease rights to a photo on my wifes Flickr site to use for advertising.  She appreciated the honesty, and told them to go ahead.  They put the image on some small trays, and sent her a stack.  This was a image taken with a point and shoot, and heavily photoshopped to remove a fence in front of the animals.
I have my own website, so I'm not concerned about instagram.  I have some old scanned images of my ancestors on Facebook, and on Ancestry.com.  Those who want them are welcome, and I've also found many photos of my ancestors that others were willing to share.
This is a snapshot of the tray.   She gave some to our kids, and keeps one to show occasionally.  We've never used it for cheese, we have made goat cheese, but our horse is a gelding, no horse milk

[sagittariansrock]

Flickr lets you assign controls and copyright restrictions to your images.  For a free service, they are pretty clear on user rights.  A small German business making horse and goat cheese asked to lease rights to a photo on my wifes Flickr site to use for advertising.  She appreciated the honesty, and told them to go ahead.  They put the image on some small trays, and sent her a stack.  This was a image taken with a point and shoot, and heavily photoshopped to remove a fence in front of the animals.
I have my own website, so I'm not concerned about instagram.  I have some old scanned images of my ancestors on Facebook, and on Ancestry.com.  Those who want them are welcome, and I've also found many photos of my ancestors that others were willing to share.
This is a snapshot of the tray.   She gave some to our kids, and keeps one to show occasionally.  We've never used it for cheese, we have made goat cheese, but our horse is a gelding, no horse milk

Can I lease this picture to illustrate that the real photographic gear is the not the camera, but the eyes and the brain  behind it?
Just kidding, very nice picture though!

[Jay Khaos]

.

[Patrick]

sagittariansrock said...

"Can I lease this picture to illustrate that the real photographic gear is the not the camera, but the eyes and the brain behind it?
Just kidding, very nice picture though!"

This quote should be made a 'sticky' post for the Forums to remind all of us that, just as the Chef makes the meal not the oven, the photographer makes the photograph not the camera - even if it's got the best L series lens on it!

[neuroanatomist]

just as the Chef makes the meal not the oven, the photographer makes the photograph not the camera

...so, I guess Instagram is the Swanson TV Dinner in this analogy?