PRIVACY

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but I can't find it if it has.

Is there any way our photos can be hidden from public and 3rd party searches, such as on Google?

Like many of us on the forum, I use Flickr to display my photos, and am careful to ensure my photos cannot be downloaded easily by members of the general public, and that they do not show up in public search engines such as Google. What is the point in my doing that when any photos I post to the forum show up very easily in Google Images, with an "open in new window" link that takes you to the thread on which they were posted, and from there can be downloaded by any Tom, Dick or Harriet.

Surely if Flickr has the facility to stop images showing in Google Images etc. then the RSPB could do the same?

I know my photos are nowhere near good enough for people to steal to make money from, but it is a matter of principle that they should be protected.

  • Hi sparrow, just checked this out and apparently not. Whilst Flickr does have the option to prevent images from being harvested in searches, we are a completely different animal to Flickr. On a forum where images are posted along with text on threads that are available for searching, there is no way of preventing the images being picked up along with the text. We want people searching the Internet to be able to find answers from the RSPB and for our conservation messages and informative discussions to be there for all to see, that means that all threads get picked up by searches, including those with images held within.

    I can see only one option that will allow posting images that you don't want the rest of the world to find in searches. Post them to Flickr and utilise the option for not sharing them globally (it may be worded differently). If you then wish to share the picture on forums but don't want it to appear in image searches, you should be able to supply a link to them in threads without this occurring. However the thread will still be visible including the link, the image however shouldn't appear in searches.

    I hope this makes sense.

  • I should add if you are happy for your images to appear in searches then please post away it's great to see them BUT if you want them to be clearly marked as your own then I believe there are a number of tools you can use to embed a watermark into a digital photograph to discourage the use or copying of them without permission. Some useful tips here

  • I agree,Ian.The whole point of being on this forum is to share experiences & knowledge(and have fun).The rspb is not exclusive.I have learnt most from the photographs posted by members on this forum but have no qualms in downloading pictures of birds from other sites to expand my knowledge.

    If members want to protect their photos,they should sign & watermark them.

    By becoming a member of this community I think you forego the right to absolute privacy.It`s a "in the public interest" thing.

  • Seems like it's a case of, if you want privacy from 3rd party sites don't use the RSPB community website and that is a shame.

  • As a postscript..

    It is not after all a "Birds do the funniest things" private club.

  • I must admit I have learned a lot from other folk's photos (and hope some folk might learn from some of mine) so am happy that my photos can be found through tags etc.

    I think it would be a shame to restrict access to photos on this website - if I don't want to risk them being copied, I don't upload them.   Also, I usually shrink my files first (mainly as it makes them easier to upload) - this means the file probably would not be much use if somebody wanted to download it for a high quality print or to pass it off as their own in a competition - not that anybody is likely to do that with any of mine anyway - but who knows!!!)

  • Thanks Ian for your explanation. I fully understand the need for the forum to be accessible to the public.

    It seems those who want to protect their images must shrink them to smaller dimensions and reduced dpi. to make them less attractive to the undesirables who do steal other folks' photos for rather more than personal use. (and there are plenty of these people about - as I am well aware, having seen some of my own photos downloaded and used on other websites without a word of credit - not wildlife ones I hasten to add, but from another hobby)

  • Susan H said:
    It seems those who want to protect their images must shrink them to smaller dimensions and reduced dpi...........

    Just as a matter of interest , you don't physically reduce the dpi.  DPI is purely an instruction from the computer to the printing device , which you embed in the metadata , telling it how many dots per inch to apply to the paper. Whatever dpi  you put in the metadata can be ignored or altered when someone prints the photo.

  • Neil R said:

    Seems like it's a case of, if you want privacy from 3rd party sites don't use the RSPB community website and that is a shame.

    Alan is right, the RSPB community forum is no different to other forums in terms of privacy. Whilst we actively encourage people to share pictures on here whether you do or not boils down to personal choice. Wherever you post your pictures on the Internet, unless you take steps to prevent it, they are likely to crop up in searches or be viewed by people who you don't want to view them. The flip side of the coin is that those who you want to see them will get to enjoy them and they may help, educate or inspire other people who come across them by accident. It's a judgement call that we all have to make when posting pictures online.

    I am of the opinion that If you have images that you don't want to the world to see for whatever reason then don't post them anywhere on the Internet to be on the safe side. However, if you are happy to share images but have concerns about them being misused it is well worth following the suggestions (thanks all) in this thread that make it harder for those unscrupulous charachters out there who might look to use other peoples images without licence to do so.