Your thoughts on image sizes and Copyright?

**JustinBeckett** · August 1st, 2006, 10:18 PM

Just wondering, what are your thoughts on posting large photography images to the internet. Everyone knows larger pics look better, but, for me, i post smaller sizes approximately 600 x 400, because i don't want them to be stolen/printed out. But i donno, i see some top photographers posting large images, im sure theres get stolen....? Whats your thoughts..What do you do? Do you care?

Just my litte rant.. thx.

~JB

**Fingers** · August 1st, 2006, 11:33 PM

I tend to use 800x600 or smaller when posting on the forum just because that's easier to view in a browser. There's obviously a huge difference to the original size, so these probably wouldn't look too good printed. But frankly I'm not too concerned about that. If you're showing your pictures to people here, what difference does it make whether they view it on screen or on paper? The possibility that someone will profit in some way by presenting your pictures as their own seems remote as well...

**Norwin** · August 2nd, 2006, 12:40 PM

Well there was a time when I used only 600x400 pictures (even password-protected)... But after a while I found out: it really suckz! =P
Now I use images up to 1000 pixels...
Best thing would be to use macromedia flash..

**Y-S** · August 4th, 2006, 02:22 AM

just make sure you put your watermark on it or your name on it that's all that matters.....

**Y-S** · August 4th, 2006, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by Insane

Well there was a time when I used only 600x400 pictures (even password-protected)... But after a while I found out: it really suckz! =P
Now I use images up to 1000 pixels...
Best thing would be to use macromedia flash..

"print scrn"

lol

**Norwin** · August 4th, 2006, 06:10 AM

Y-S:
There is always a possibility to copy photos, no question! But the normal internetuser is stupid and I bet that using macromedia flash will avoid about 80% of the rips... (The average of people don't even know how to crop images...)