david_herman4

<p>Thanks Everyone!</p>

<p>David</p>

<p>Just ta add a little sidenote to my question...<br /> Here's a related article I remembered reading and finally found, by Mike Johnson of TOP on the subject.<br /> <a href="http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/c-in-circle-reminder.html">http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/c-in-circle-reminder.html</a></p>

<p>Back to the crux of my original question...<br>

How am I the printer, to know for sure that ANY file brought to me to print is indeed the lawful property of the person who asks me to print if there is no data to identify <em>ownership of copyright</em>.<br>

There are billions of good photos of the Grand Canyon taken by photogs of all skill levels,amature or pro out there in world.<br>

Am I to have every person who brings me a file of the Grand Canyon to print,(or<em> any</em> other subject matter), sign a release that certifies ownership ?<br>

In my mind this is about tantamount to the local police stopping every motorist in every car on the road to prove that the car is not stolen and they are the owner!<br>

Where do I draw the line?... </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ellis,<br>

I had <em>absolutely no reason</em> to suspect or question the file was not taken by the friend of the client that brought it in to ask me to print it. It is a photo anyone could have captured, candid, outdoor, no studio background, no special lighting, .<br>

Am I to make every person who brings in a file to print, prove without a question of doubt,signed in blood,sworn on the Bible, that they own the photo (file) if there is absolutely no exif, iptc metadata,copyright symbol, proof marking, or watermark, indicating that the file was taken by a pro?<br>

This was a 40k file! not 10, 16, 24 or 50MB</p>

 

<p>I do photo printing and art reproduction for clients and would never knowingly reproduce copyrighted material.I was recently asked to print a vey small 40<strong>K</strong> file from a memory stick (not a CD), to 8x10, that could have easily been photographed by <em>anyone</em> with any halfway decent P&S!<br /> I had absolutely no idea or indication on the image or file that this could have been a pro portrait.No exif data to indicate the maker,camera ,etc.<br /> I have come to find out roundabout that the photo was indeed a pro portrait proof and I may have unknowingly printed and infringed on a pros work.<br /> how is one to know when a file is copyrighted if there is no indication, I am not informed by the client, and could I be liable for infringement ?<br /> Isn't the photographer obligated to mark the files with either a copyright symbol,proof, or watermark tp protect their copyright?</p>

<p>Picture People is the name of the game where I live along with Sears, Walmart,JC Penney,<br /> this is a model for what they charge...<br /> <a href="http://www.picturepeople.com/portrait-products/portrait_cds">http://www.picturepeople.com/portrait-products/portrait_cds</a><br /> your better than them! charge a little more and charge according to how many files you take on the shoot, they normally don't take all that many.</p>

<p>I had a young teen and his mom come into my store today to inquire about printing some of his photos, (quite good for a 14 y old) .We got into a discussion about photography and I recommended this site, 1x, and Flickriver for inspirational viewing.I totally forgot about the nude content and sincerely hope his mom doesn't find out and get outraged that I turned him on to some of the inappropriate content presented openly here! </p>

<p>I have recently been doing some stitching, stacking, and HDR Pro merges of my RAWs in CS5. From reading a few authors books I am understanding that it is very advantageous to do as much editing(both global and local), in ACR as it is totally non destructive, and for using some tools, easier or quicker than CS5 itself.<br>

Since ACR will not work with layered files, must all RAW files first be merged,stitched,etc, then flattened and re-opened before any further edits can be performed in ACR? By doing so, am I degrading the file? Is there a better way to get around this limitation in ACR. There doesn't appear to be any way to utilize 'smart objects' either unless I'm missing something.<br>

Thanks in advance,<br>

David</p>

<p>"Any idea why it changes with caps lock?"<br>

Just found this thread and had recently been nearly driven to the brink with the same problem.<br>

After numerous futile attempts to change the brushtip settings in preferances and dredging to find the answer through Adobe CS5 online un/help site,<br>

I decided to try and find the answer in one of the 6 CS5 textbooks I now own.<br>

Scott Kelbys CS5 book, pages on setting up brush preferances was a no go, but hitting my second book in the pile<br>

Photoshop CS5 on Demand by Steve Johnson had the answer...<br>

The 'caps lock key option' is there so you can quickly change any settiings brush tip on the fly to the 'Precise' mode by using the keyboard shortcut.<br>

Apparantly since my keyboard is partially obscured under the desktop I failed to see the caps lock indicator light lit at the top of the keyboard.Not that I would have known that this was the reason at the time.<br>

Another very simple yet aggravating 'hidden' problem I've encountered in the past, was not being able to correctly select my foreground/background colors (reversing), using the x key. <br>

Had to pose that one on the Adobe forum to find that the answer was hidden in the Colors Box Window, foreground/background selection boxes.<br>

David</p>

<p> </p>