Photo use (was Facebook)

Jacob Knecht
Mon, 21 Jan 2013 18:44:35 PST
Hi all,

I don't get to follow or post often here due to time restrictions but I saw
Matt's comment and felt compelled to add a few quick personal thoughts:

> As for photo fear...really? Who would really want a photo of a Massonia
> pustulata besides us? Or someone who should be in this group? No one sells
> photos anymore, and no  one pays for the use of photos anymore. In a world
> of Instagram and Twitter, photos should be our greatest asset.
> I file this fear in the same bucket as those who still place those annoying
> © copyright lines ghosted over their images. Crazy.

While I agree that copryright stamps on photos are unsightly and this is
why I've never used them, despite my concern about theft, I strongly
disagree with your statement about photo vale/copyright.

"No one sells photos anymore, and no one pays for the use of photos
anymore" It's dangerous to overgeneralise.  There has been a decline in
this area, but good photos still have value and are still very much bought
and sold.  I sell publishing rights to a number of my photos to magazines,
journals, websites, newspapers and licensing to plant vendors.

I put a great deal of care, effort and resources into the photos I take and
share on my flickr and tumblr accounts, as well as upload to the PBS wiki.
I share my photos because I want as many people to enjoy and be inspired by
them as possible, especially I hope to get more younger folks interested in
horticulture.  My photos are continually used on other websites and blogs
without attribution. When there isn't attribution or back-linking I am
disappointed but not terribly so.  My photos are quite often stolen for use
by web- and eBay-based sellers of plants and seeds. I take issue when
people take my creative content (photos or text) without out permission to
use for their own monetary gain, that is real theft, both unethical and
thankfully still illegal.

PBS wiki photos used *all the time* on eBay for plants and seeds.  I don't
have time to be the policeman but this theft is shameful. Without these
images they wouldn't be able to sell hardly any of their wares. It is
perhaps easy for someone on the outside to devalue an image of a special
plant, seeing as how spoiled we've become with the internet, but surely
Matt as someone who takes beautiful images of your own plants, you know
that costs go into each photo: the expense, time and effort of acquiring,
growing, bringing to flower and being present with the plant at the right
moment and lighting for the photo, not to mention the time in editing,
uploading, and the cost of camera equipment.  What about in situ photos,
with all the travel costs?

The internet is huge now with seemingly immeasurable data but we need to be
reminded that quality content doesn't create itself, such content only
springs from genuine effort and resources. I maintain that quality photos
of interesting subjects will continue to have value for many years to come.

Jacob Knecht

> On 1/21/13 5:49 PM, "Ina" <> wrote:
> > So the page is there. But there is no way to do anything except look at
> > it and like it.  How can it be made to be useful?
> >
> > Ina
> >
> > Ina Crossley
> > Auckland New Zealand  Zone 10
> >
> > On 22/01/2013 11:31 a.m., Steve Marak wrote:
> >> Neither slings nor arrows here, Jim.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > pbs mailing list
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> pbs mailing list

More information about the pbs mailing list