1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Facebook photo etiquette

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Steven, Nov 23, 2013.

  1. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    USA
    Sometimes I take pictures of musicians in concert and I post the album on their Facebook page. Sometimes they like them and repost them on their facebook timeline. I assume the proper protocol to do this, on their part, is by using the "share" function so that I can see all the following likes/comments/shares, however I notice some just download the photo and post it like that. I can't say I mind terribly, but I feel a bit of credit would be in order. Some just thank me verbally in the photo posting. I messaged one once who did not give credit at all and it was added.
    I started adding a faint watermark in the corner because of this.

    Do some people just not know how to use the share function, is it limiting in some way I don't know about, or are there other motives ? :frown: :confused: Any thoughts/ideas?
     
  2. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    There are many ways to share on Facebook, and they have different effects. Directly posting on one's own timeline has the greatest impact in my experience. If you just add an album through your photos it doesn't get exposure unless you tag others, whereas if you add an album by posting in your timeline your friends get notified, even without tagging them.

    A re-share should have the same effect as a timeline post, but it does copy through all the contents of your post, and puts it in a sort of quotation frame, which they may not like on their timeline... hence the manual re-share, but then they have to go through the effort of tagging you in it, etc. Also, I'm not sure what happens if you delete the original for a re-share - they might want it to stick around on their timeline.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. bredman

    bredman Mu-43 Veteran

    458
    May 30, 2013
    Sherwood Forest
    Pete
    I thought Facebook take ownership of any images and videos posted on there. It will soon be a free-for-all, if not already. Isn't the wording "transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license". Even if you delete your account any shared images will remain, including in the backups. If you post images on FB you may as well wave them goodbye.
     
  4. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    Yeah, people do that all the time... it's encouraged by the FB setup (e.g. making a photo your profile pic doesn't preserve credit).

    However, it's also just a reflection of the fact that people rarely place value on images anymore. Everyone loves good photos, but partially because the Internet has made instant access to millions of beautiful photographs instantaneous, they don't value them as artwork and individual creations.

    Even before the Internet, photographs struggled to find value because it's often seen as something everyone does - we all take photographs on our phones or point and shoot cameras after all. It's much harder for people to perceive the work and skill/talent that goes into a photograph, and it's viewed more as "you were so lucky to be in the right place at the right time!". Think about a gorgeous sunset landscape scene for example. The photographer might have come out the day before to scout a location, spent 2 hours setting up the composition exactly as desired, carefully arranged up a graduated filter to expose the shot just so, and spent another half hour editing it to painstakingly maximize the impact. But to the average person, I suspect it's perceived as "you have a really nice camera!" + "wow, were lucky to catch a really pretty looking sunset when you snapped that!". Regardless, the point is in a lot of cases the value (a.k.a. the time investment, effort, and skill) just isn't apparent to a lot of folks.

    On a more practical note, when it comes to FB, I have taken 2 approaches to this:

    1) I just don't worry about it generally
    2) I watermark some things with a small watermark (usually cropped out when people use photos as profile photos anyway)

    I've gone from #1 to #2 and back again in the course of posting to FB, and I can't say if I'll oscillate back again in the near future. Currently I've taken to just asking myself which things am I worried about being reposted/downloaded/shared without attribution, and try to only watermark those. I used to watermark everything through LR's plugin automatically, but I felt silly watermarking birthday party photos or whatever so now I'm a little more selective.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    Yes, it's definitely troubling. It basically allows FB the ability to swipe your photos for advertising purposes.

    However, you still retain copyright on your photos by law, so it's not quite putting them in the public domain or making it a complete free-for-all for the world at large (yet).
     
  6. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I had lots of internal debates until I decided not to worry too much about it, given that making money doesn't come into it. Even if you post screen sized previews from somewhere with better licensing terms like Flickr (which I tried but gave up on because it was so ridiculously slow), Facebook can use the previews that end up on it. So I just limit it to screen sized previews on Facebook, and people I trust can get full sized ones by asking me directly. Watermarking photos from friends' parties just seemed dorky to me...