David Sanger Photography - Latest Comments

Re: Bay Peaks Book

David Sanger — Fri, 15 Feb 2019 15:16:24 -0000

https://www.bayareapeaks.com now mobile friendly with faster web host.

Re: Top 5 places to photograph the Golden Gate Bridge

Pippa Wilson — Tue, 02 May 2017 05:35:10 -0000

All are very stunning here . Every place are perfect for better photographs . You are well-done for shared this post .

Re: Top 5 places to photograph the Golden Gate Bridge

Abdullah Allamin — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:51:00 -0000

Thanks for sharing this wonderful photographs of Golden gate bridge.

Re: The Surprise of Shipping Photography

Paul Bear — Mon, 22 Dec 2014 16:15:29 -0000

Shipping containers lend an image a good sense of scale. You get a feel for the enormity of those vessels and the hoists when you see them. The vivid colors against the blue sky and water also catch the eye. tasbulk.com.au

Re: Peaks

Cindy Capobianco — Sun, 28 Sep 2014 11:32:05 -0000

Beautiful Pictures David..Thank You!

Re: Peaks

David Sanger — Tue, 02 Sep 2014 09:06:13 -0000

yes. have been enjoying the challenge. "the best camera is the one you have with you"

Re: Peaks

Stewart Marshall — Tue, 02 Sep 2014 05:10:26 -0000

Awesome photos. They really capture the emotions of the hike. And all on an iPhone?

Re: Eye Candy

disqus_FNu2OAvXyr — Tue, 15 Jul 2014 06:08:15 -0000

Brilliantly done, sunset is really very pretty but i must say that you captured it very well
For more information visit our website

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

James Morley — Wed, 22 Jan 2014 12:17:10 -0000

Wow, some very polarised views here and people interpreting comments very differently to how I did. The only thing I can see that everyone agrees with is that copyright laws need changing! One thing I would specifically comment on is that the Getty/AFP/Morel case is very different from what is being discussed in this case, where innocent (in the broadest sense) individuals were involved, not large commercial companies who should have known better.

It strikes me that the basic problem lies in both the nature of the medium and the technology that supports it. Combine that with a confused bunch of 'users' with no clear guidance on what is best practice or even just decent, let alone the law, and it's a recipe for the chaos that ensues. And the sad thing is that in almost all cases no-one sets out to intentionally upset anyone, and if they had a helping hand they'd be more than happy to do the correct thing (as this case shows with the fact that three people took the trouble to provide attribution, even though they got it wrong).

But isn't technology part of the answer? When you publish an image, embed copyright information. When it is saved, modified, shared ensure that that information persists (one of the almost ubiquitous failings of current social media platforms which strip out metadata). Wherever it is published make sure that that information is readily accesible (for example on Flickr you can see EXIF data extracted from the uploaded image - http://www.flickr.com/photo... - and why not make a right-click option available in every modern web browser to view basic exif/iptc data on any image?).

Then that crucial trail would not be lost at every step.

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

David Sanger — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 21:14:12 -0000

One interesting detail in the study was that in three of the postings the photo actually was credited, including once with the © symbol and yet none of the attributions correctly identified the author. Rather they simply identified the place where the poster found the image, one step back in the chain.

Whereas search by image can find where on the internet an image has been used, it is quite a different matter to determine which, if any of those, are the canonical source (creator or licensing agent). As it turned out with the piano player the original source was only identified in Facebook, and not in Google Image Search or TIneye.

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

jimgoldstein — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:32:00 -0000

Would be ideal if social media sites asked image author via a field. While it would provide a consistent process improvement it still would be hinged on human input and their lies the problem. No matter what we're dependent on people knowing what the right thing to do is. Ultimately though this is of greater value to photographers who are the minority. The vast majority of people see the value in image viewing as entertainment not being the keeper of proper citation and credit.

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

Per-BKWine — Mon, 16 Dec 2013 03:42:32 -0000

David,

I use "seem to be saying" because it is not entirely clear to me what your argument is. Therefore I do my best to interpret what you write and restate it so that you can tell me if my understanding is correct or not. But it seems (again) that what I read into your text was not entirely what you intended with it.

I can certainly agree with you on that there is good reason to review copyright legislation. (Just like any other type of legislation it will and should change over time.)

I am less certain that today's technology is a reason to accept as normal wholesale copyright infringement. But I imagine that that is not what you are saying either.

There is a tendency today of people to say "you put it on the internet and then it is OK for anyone to use it". In particular when it comes to photography. Most people still do understand that texts have a creator and that you cannot just copy them. Same thing for music and films. But not for photography.

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

David Sanger — Sun, 15 Dec 2013 23:38:37 -0000

Actually I am not saying any of those things you suggest I "seem to be saying" and I am well aware copyright law in all its details.

My main point is that with the current technology of the internet images do in fact spread very quickly, whether photographers like it or not, and they do so without any real concern for the most part with existing copyright laws and constraints. That's the situation we find ourselves in. Wishing it were otherwise, or chastising people who share images for ethical "lapses" doesn't help.

It is more helpful I think to focus on those situations where a publisher (a real media outlet like Der Spiegel or the New York Times, or even Getty Images) wants to use a photo they find and in social media, particularly when it relates to a breaking story, and has to track down the source for permissions.

With the introduction of Google Search by Images and Tineye it certainly has become easier than in the past, but even then as I show in the post, finding the canonical source can be quite a task. There are things we can do to expedite this, by building a better, more comprehensive searchable source. I disagree that it "can't work". DMOZ was a hand crafted registry and real a very different proposition altogether.

This does bring up the question of formalities under the Berne Convention. The circumstances under which they were proposed in 1868 were very different than now. Formalities required the author delivering a printed copy of a book, at the time consuming and expensive effort. Today with billions and billions of photos uploaded every day to online sites it if quite often impossible to find out whether a photo is copyrighted at all, let alone find the actual creator or licensor. There is active discussion at present among copyright agencies and scholars on whether to reintroduce some elements of formalities in order to make a way for publishers and creators to connect. see http://www.wipo.int/copyrig... and http://www.law.berkeley.edu...

Certainly this will be an ongoing discussion in a rapidly changing environment,

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

Per-BKWine — Sun, 15 Dec 2013 12:42:00 -0000

David,

What you seems to be saying is that "the end justifies the means". That is rarely an ethical standpoint, but usually something used to defend a reproachable action if it has a good purpose.

Let's disregard the fact that in this specific case the creator had actually given his permission for everyone and anyone to use it. (If we don't disregard that fact this whole discussion becomes irrelevant.)

Then what you seem to be saying is that "if a photo has 'high and immediate news value' then it is OK to disregard copyright", is that not a correct interpretation?

If so, the conclusion would be that you think that the "Daniel Morel judgement", awarding damages from AFP and Getty is wrong and that you think that AFP and Getty was right in not paying attention to copyright.

In effect, I think it is difficult to claim that "urgency" justifies infringement of copyright. "Urgency" in whose eyes?

Your solution to this "conundrum" (it is not, laws are pretty clear) is to organise a centralised registry for copyright for professional photographers. I don't think that is a good solution, nor a conceivably practical solution. For several reasons. For example:

- "centralised registries" don't generally work on the internet. (Anyone remembers Dmoz, "the Open Directory Project", that aimed to catalogue all internet sites in an organised catalogue/registry? Anyone uses it today? No...)

- copyright is independent of "registration". The creator owns copyright by the simple fact of creation. No need for any registration. (Just for the record, the US system of "registering" copyright has an entirely different purpose and does not have any impact on ownership of copyright. And it is purely US.)

- you say "professional photographers". Anyone, be it a professional or an amateur, owns the copyright of what he has created. Would you expect everyone to register every image in such a centralised registry? It won't happen.
- ...

In fact, the onus is on the user/publisher. It is the user/publisher who must figure out who owns the copyright (just like you did for the piano player). If he can't find out then he should not use the image, not even if he thinks it is "urgent" or "newsworthy".

I can't see any good reason why that should change.

Re: Eye Candy

David Sanger — Sat, 14 Dec 2013 13:08:01 -0000

Thanks everyone for all the comments. We do sometimes get jaded, but it helps to remember the difference between looking at a photo we like and actually going outside and finding a scene in real life. For me that's what's the most exciting of all.

Re: The Piano Player of Kiev

David Sanger — Sat, 14 Dec 2013 13:05:37 -0000

Of course that's our classical understanding Per. This case is interesting though because of the very high and immediate news value of the image and the fact that it had spread so rapidly across the internet. It is the technology that makes this possible and tracking down the source can actually be quite difficult. More and more often now news sources, at least the less formal ones, blogs etc. will not be so careful.

As it is the image was intended to be widely published so anyone who did trace back to the source would have discovered that.

The remedy I believe is to use the same power of the internet to make the search much, much easier and more reliable. If there were an easily searchable repository of all images produced by professional photographers, news outlets, stock agencies or any person interested in licensing or attribution, and if uploading were as simple as drag and drop folders of thousands of images, and if Google and other search images could recognize that repository as the canonical source of an image, and provide easy steps to contact the source, then the problem would be greatly simplified.

Re: Eye Candy

Michael Eisbrener — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:12:12 -0000

I am about as far from a photographer as anyone on the planet. If I see something I like I just push the button as fast as the camera allows. Every once in awhile I catch something and most of them get deleted... too often the one between was the one I wanted.

Re: Eye Candy

Charles Garcia — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:11:36 -0000

Great picture David and nice post!

Re: Eye Candy

amidiabetic — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:50:18 -0000

I don't see a problem with using Photoshop. I have taken shots where a telegraph pole or wires are in the sky spoilng the shot. it's not too different from setting up a shot before you take the photograph, it is manipulation either way, just as long as it is not overcooked with Photoshop.

Re: Eye Candy

Michael Young — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:41:12 -0000

Excellent post. I really loved this - "The true value of the image is not so much that it looks wondrous, but that it can inspire the viewer to go out themselves and see the sunset, to seek and find their own moments of awe and inspiration" - surely the aim of every travel photographer. Well done :-)

Re: Eye Candy

Christophe — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:38:28 -0000

Stunning sunset!

Re: Eye Candy

Janette Toral — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:24:34 -0000

I love taking sunset shots especially when I am out of town. A perfect way to wrap it up.

Re: Eye Candy

Kita Champion — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:20:43 -0000

Beauty doesn't mean perfection. It's all in the eyes of the beholder. -- Kita

Re: Eye Candy

pfgregg — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:13:14 -0000

Awesome - shared it!

Re: Eye Candy

Alan Darnell — Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:10:38 -0000

great scene