Stop Using Instagram

[preppyak]

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.

Depends on the market. If Facebook is trying to undercut microstock for bloggers/online news, then cell phone photos will be perfectly fine. There's still a decent amount of money is selling subscriptions that way; especially when it only costs you storage space to produce those images. Their labor cost is lower than a microstock place that pays photographers.

That said, I think a lot of people will abandon them after their last few changes. Taking away Twitter usability and then this is a good way to piss people off and make them go elsewhere

[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.

Depends on the market. If Facebook is trying to undercut microstock for bloggers/online news, then cell phone photos will be perfectly fine. There's still a decent amount of money is selling subscriptions that way; especially when it only costs you storage space to produce those images. Their labor cost is lower than a microstock place that pays photographers.

That said, I think a lot of people will abandon them after their last few changes. Taking away Twitter usability and then this is a good way to piss people off and make them go elsewhere

Istock has editorial licensed photos that are free for use on blogger non-commercial sites already in place. The Small file size sales are pretty decent and already are cheap for bloggers.

Then again, We won't really know until next year.

[Drizzt321]

Nobody can steal copyright, they can steal the image (which is not the case here) or the original copyright holder can assign rights to others, which is the case here. If you don't agree with an end user license and their draconian copyright sharing policies then don't tick the box to signup for an account.

Further, once you have ticked the box and got an account there is usually a clause in there that states you agree to any changes unless you opt out, that is, if you don't monitor what changes they make to the agreement and do nothing then you are considered to have agreed with the changes.

So, pay attention to the agreements you make and any emailed changes to the end user license. Don't post anything unless you are happy to give it away anyway, these big corporations might be trying to make money off your images legally but plenty of people are happy to just copy and paste, steal, your image if it is what they want. Never, ever, post a high res image anywhere unless you really don't care about it, plenty of customers will be happy with even low res small prints they can take off proofing web pages without paying.

Talking of high res images, for this forum I did post three comparison images at full res on a hosting site, despite the fact that probably only 100 or so people read the thread, the links were not high profile and few would have found the image interesting they have subsequently been viewed over 5,000 times in two weeks. That hosting site has tagged them, I didn't, and the images are now searchable, and they are obviously coming up in searches.

Which hosting company? I'll want to avoid it if I can...

[RustyTheGeek]

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?   

Love it neuro!  LOL!

[Drizzt321]

Nobody can steal copyright, they can steal the image (which is not the case here) or the original copyright holder can assign rights to others, which is the case here. If you don't agree with an end user license and their draconian copyright sharing policies then don't tick the box to signup for an account.

Further, once you have ticked the box and got an account there is usually a clause in there that states you agree to any changes unless you opt out, that is, if you don't monitor what changes they make to the agreement and do nothing then you are considered to have agreed with the changes.

So, pay attention to the agreements you make and any emailed changes to the end user license. Don't post anything unless you are happy to give it away anyway, these big corporations might be trying to make money off your images legally but plenty of people are happy to just copy and paste, steal, your image if it is what they want. Never, ever, post a high res image anywhere unless you really don't care about it, plenty of customers will be happy with even low res small prints they can take off proofing web pages without paying.

Talking of high res images, for this forum I did post three comparison images at full res on a hosting site, despite the fact that probably only 100 or so people read the thread, the links were not high profile and few would have found the image interesting they have subsequently been viewed over 5,000 times in two weeks. That hosting site has tagged them, I didn't, and the images are now searchable, and they are obviously coming up in searches.

Which hosting company? I'll want to avoid it if I can...

Minus.com

http://minus.com/lKDaU0HCu4BgR

Thanks. Interesting, never heard of them.

Is anyone else totally hating the bottom footer (e.g. About, FAQ, Help, Contact Us, etc) that keeps disappearing? It's freaking annoying! I want to click on those, but they are never visible on the screen! WTF! Facebook is another big offender when it comes to that and the timeline. Grrrr...

Oh, and found another opinion on the updated Instagram policy. Looks like it's more a clarification of language that already sorta gave them those rights anyway.

[dtaylor]

Read.
Understand.
Comprehend.
Then delete your photos.
Then delete your account.

Well, that's what I would do if I had ever used it.
But I urge you all to do the same (you can keep the photos on your own pc, fine, but just take them off the website).
If we let companies like this get away with massive copyright infringements like this, then more will be tempted to do the same. Send a message now, otherwise facebook and flickr will be next, then anything you've ever sent on gmail and yahoo, and after that Canon will claim all the photos you ever make on one of their cameras.

Not that I used it much...but the Instagram app is GONE. Thank you.

[dirtcastle]

While it appears to be a nefarious policy and big PR mistake, my guess is that the reaction to the policy is mostly overreaction.

1. Let's face it: 99.999% of photographs on Instagram aren't worth $0.0001.

2. For aspiring photographers, Instagram can provide a marketing opportunity that can outweigh the limited piracy risks.

3. If Instagram/Facebook attempts to set up some sort of "stock" sale, my guess is that there would be a class action lawsuit.

4. If you don't enjoy Instagram enough to justify the occasional image theft... why are you using it in the first place?

More than likely, this policy will simply allow Instagram to do things like sell you your own photos back to you someday (or use your photos in Instagram marketing).

[Meh]

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?   

Droll, Neuro, very droll.   

[Meh]

I don't like these new ToS either but the new terms are essentially what FB has had for a number of years and I'm not aware FB has ever used anyone's photos in the way people are worried about.  I can imagine the problem faced by FB and other social network sites would be that by definition they are sharing your photos with other people, those people could do something like take a screen shot and reshare, or some other casual use that the copyright owner could then make a claim against FB (i.e. sue the guy with the deepest pockets).  So what FB wants is an indemnity that the users can not sue FB for any infringement and would have to make their claim against the third party directly.  I'm not excusing their ToS and perhaps there is better language they could use but I suspect the lawyers have decided this is the most protective method.  But still, I say everyone cancel their instagram and FB account NOW... well, give me a few hours to put some heavy short positions on the stock.

[cayenne]

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!

Ni!!!

[cayenne]

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/

Very interesting, and thanks for the links...

But it did make me want to question. Does anyone not just set up their own small server at home for personal stuff or business anymore?

I have Cox Business, only $69/mo, I can set up and run as many servers as I wish, no caps, no blocked ports, speeds approx 10up and 8-9 down....

I like photography, but I like to tinker with computers. I used to do the webstuff by hand, but am looking into almost turnkey applications/frameworks for sites for posting photos, blogging...etc.

Just curious if anyone still does a bit of DIY on the internet side of you businesses?

C

[infared]

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.

I agree with what you are saying, Bill... but this is the largest blatant encroachment on other people's property. I used to shoot for a livingbut thank God..... I got out! Many, Many people think I should show up with $1000's and $1000's of dollars worth of equipment and work like a dog to produce art...and for some reason they feel that they do not have to pay for it or pay very little.
If I show up with my truck full of carpenters tools and work all day...they are willing to pay for it??? Never has made any sense to me. ..but one thing that does make sense to me is to not give ANYTHING to Instagram or Facebook for free. As far as I am concerned what they are doing is "technically" legal...(read the find print)..but just plain sleazy and unethical.  It is just another "GOTCHA". I feel that it is a personal invasion. ...but like I said...I am in the minority..and most do not feel that way.  Oh well.
Also...I have to disagree with something else....I have seen some KILLER talent making awesome art on Instagram. ..I am going to have to call it the art of our times....new media... Phone images are becoming more valid and there is some serious talent out there manipulating and tweaking some wonderful art. They should be compensated for there creations if a large corporation sells it outright for media or advertising purposes or uses the art to advertise their business. Burying some legalese in fine print so that you can basically cheat or deceive someone is just bad ethics.
...but other than that ...it doesn't bother me! LOL! 

[RustyTheGeek]

THIS STORY
http://mashable.com/2011/05/17/space-shuttle-twitpic/

has been around for awhile now and while it surprised some, I didn't blink an eye.  It is safe to assume that if you put anything in the cloud, even simple emails or text msgs, it's gone and available for anyone to use with or without your permission.  This is why even with stuff you 'sort of' 'can' control, you should probably watermark it if you want to at least get credit for it.

[picturesbyme]

How is this news? This is going on years ago on fb and other sites and people just realized it now?
This is why I post with low res + large watermark. (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=10985.msg197166#msg197166)
Sure it takes away a bit but still better than nothing and due to the w.marks my site gets more exposure...

Do you check permissions on apps you download and use on your phones or that's a new thing too? 

[RustyTheGeek]

infared - while I understand your point and agree, I do my photography for ME and let those around me benefit.  Since I'm not a pro, I see my hobby as an activity that might bother some when I take a lot of pictures but when I freely share them, they don't mind so much.  Sort of like inviting the neighbors to a loud party you're hosting.  So I am probably not helping any pros by doing so much for free but it's my contribution to volunteer activities such as Boy Scouts, School and Church.

If I did photography for a living, I would treat it much like I do IT consulting.  Charge by the hour or by the job and make sure everyone understands up front what it will probably cost including materials and billable time.  Hopefully, word of mouth would bring me good clients that are of the same mindset I would prefer.

It doesn't matter what line of work you're in, there are those who don't mind paying and expect to pay for good work and then there are those who expect a favor all the time.  I send those people to Best Buy for computer services.