Official BeyondUnreal Photography Thread

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
flo0tz

flo0tz

New Member
May 1, 2004
880
0
0
Brisbane, Australia
_Lynx said:
I guess some of you saw these on Google+, but for those who haven't, here's what I shot in Dublin:

Samuel Beckett's bridge
IMG_3001.jpg


First hotel was on the opposite side of the city from the office and I had to get up early to get there in time. At least that allowed me to enjoy sunrises just like that one:
IMG_2631.jpg


Liffey river as seen from O'Connel's bridge:
IMG_2804.jpg


Liffey river again, Samuel Beckett's bridge in the distance:
IMG_2939.jpg


Near Grand Canal Theater:
IMG_2994.jpg


Samuel Beckett's bridge again, different day, cloudy weather, long exposure:
IMG_3445.jpg
Click to expand...

These shots are great and the colour is so vivid! Was this achieved largely through post-processing or the settings you used for the shots?
 
OO7MIKE

OO7MIKE

Mr. Sexy
May 2, 2000
5,022
107
63
Nalicity, NC
_Lynx said:
I guess some of you saw these on Google+, but for those who haven't, here's what I shot in Dublin:

Samuel Beckett's bridge
IMG_3001.jpg


Samuel Beckett's bridge again, different day, cloudy weather, long exposure:
IMG_3445.jpg
Click to expand...

I'm torn! I don't know which one I like better.
 
OO7MIKE

OO7MIKE

Mr. Sexy
May 2, 2000
5,022
107
63
Nalicity, NC
I am inclined to agree. His watermark isn't redundant. I wouldn't put your email address in your watermark.. but having a watermark is better than not having one.

Publishing without permission is very bad for them.. very good for you. I would send them a bill (to different news departments). Serious. Send them a bill with your publishing rights fee and a 15% late fee for every 30 days it is not paid. Keep sending it to them every 30 days with an updated bill.

News organizations know better to simply use a photo without permission and without credit.
 
IronMonkey

IronMonkey

Moi?
Apr 23, 2005
1,746
0
36
62
Scotland
www.margrave.myzen.co.uk
OO7MIKE said:
His watermark isn't redundant.
Click to expand...
One fix:

OO7MIKE said:
News organizations should know better than to simply use a photo without permission and without credit.
Click to expand...

For all I'm not one of Andrew Orlowski's greatest admirers, you might find the quoted article interesting:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/18/photographers_orphan_works/ said:
It's hard to keep your rights information intact, when big media removes it by default. The BBC strips out all metadata on photographs as they're uploaded to its website, for example. It's an automated orphan-creation mechanism.
Click to expand...

A watermark is much more difficult to strip than metadata.

If you find your way to the BBC blog posting "justifying" their use of images sourced from the Internet and published without attribution (or, presumably, payment), it boils down to "If we think it's urgent then we think the public interest justifies us in grabbing what's available". The BBC's definition of "urgent public interest" seems to be "harassed production assistant doesn't have time to do the right thing and we don't want to be scooped by our rivals".

The long and short of it is, do not allow your work to become "orphan".
 
_Lynx

_Lynx

Strategic Military Services
Staff member
Dec 5, 2003
1,965
8
38
40
Moscow, Russia
beyondunreal.com
OO7MIKE said:
Publishing without permission is very bad for them.. very good for you. I would send them a bill (to different news departments). Serious. Send them a bill with your publishing rights fee and a 15% late fee for every 30 days it is not paid. Keep sending it to them every 30 days with an updated bill.
Click to expand...
Problem is that by the time I noticed (happened when Google added the searching by reference image), news stories illustrated with it were 3 months old. Another problem, is that this is "amateur" photo, taken during official KHL game, and I had no accreditation, so I can't charge for these. Actually, I'm ok with them using it, if they mentioned my name. But still, I have the right to sue them right away for infringing my author's right - that's 300$ minimum. I had a lot of stuff to do before my business trip, which is now pretty much over (flying back home tomorrow), so I will be able to get busy with this stuff.

Here's the pic in question, if you're curious, nothing special, but was good enough for them:
IMG_1667.jpg

This guy, coach of my favorite team, was pretty much forced to leave the club and become a head coach for national team, so for russian hockey that was story #1 this spring.

Best part - watermark is still there on some of the pics, although unreadable. Judging by how one site cites the other with the photo, One pulled the image, another cited it and reused the photo, also crediting the first one for the photo. I am not willing to negotiate with those who did it first, as they obviously had the full-size image (I'm just using the medium-sized one, but they've taken off the team's official website, where it's in full size and which uses it with my permission), which had copyright mark and my e-mail for contacts (the reason I have it there), and still used it.
 
Last edited:
OO7MIKE

OO7MIKE

Mr. Sexy
May 2, 2000
5,022
107
63
Nalicity, NC
I'm selling some of my back up gear. Last time I did this a few of you guys mentioned that you would have preferred a heads up.

Up for sale is:

Nikon D3100
Meike Grip (No more worrying about running out of power)
Extra battery (your going to want it when using the grip.)
18-55mm 3.5-5.6G VR (Very Handy Lens)
55-200mm 4-5.6G VR (VR on this lens is fantastic)
8gb Sandisk Extreme Pro 45mb/s (Fastest SD card on the market)
Nikon Camera Bag (Literally made for this camera)

I'm selling everything for slightly more than it would cost you to purchase a new Nikon D3100 (without all the extras). This way you get a lot more bang for your buck. PM me if your interested.

The Entire Lot:
IMG_0154_1.jpg


Photos taken with this camera:

Low ISO settings are simply beautiful. Better than my Canon 7d ever was. Very hard to tell the difference between the D3100 and the D700 even at ISO 400. The D3100 does looks sharper but not because it has more megapixels. I get the feeling that it is sharper per pixel.
DSC_0790.jpg


Wedding Ring shot turned out beautiful. One of my first photos taken with this camera in the field.
318960_10150274853699541_592224540_7678447_7387678_n.jpg


From a recent production. ISO 1600 or 3200 Not sure. Cleaner raw files than my 40d and 7D at high iso settings. Very shocked at how good this camera holds up.
314809_10150318404199541_592224540_7945736_333186708_n.jpg


314635_10150318403764541_592224540_7945725_519789789_n.jpg


From an even darker Theater production. Both of these are probably ISO 3200.
DSC_1451.jpg


DSC_1822.jpg
 
Last edited:
OO7MIKE

OO7MIKE

Mr. Sexy
May 2, 2000
5,022
107
63
Nalicity, NC
I saw that one the other day. Hobbyist just wanting to do some photography for photography sake are large and plentiful. Makes me sad when professionals get mixed up in that market... still the point is made and made very well.
 
Rambowjo

Rambowjo

Das Protoss
Aug 3, 2005
5,073
5
38
32
Tapeland
Took these last night :)

[SCREENSHOT]http://i.minus.com/ipQnj7xthp5C9.jpg[/SCREENSHOT]

[SCREENSHOT]http://i.minus.com/iLPxaHmtMZlCB.jpg[/SCREENSHOT]

[SCREENSHOT]http://i.minus.com/iFNZZHihTT95J.JPG[/SCREENSHOT]

[SCREENSHOT]http://i.minus.com/ibz7Vjq9LU92dH.jpg[/SCREENSHOT]

[SCREENSHOT]http://i.minus.com/ikx89qHo4xJT.jpg[/SCREENSHOT]

I really like the last one. The moon has been super bright the last few days.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom