[Closed] How can you prove you took a photo?

Digital photos have a fingerprint that links them to your camera if that helps

Think there is some info included with the picture about what camera make/model was used and when it was taken etc - don't think it can tie it to an individual camera though.

With some cameras like Nikon DSLRs you can enter a comment which gets stored in the metadata....not sure if you can lock this into the image though or whether any tom, dick or harry could edit it out again.

rockthreegozy - Member

Digital photos have a fingerprint that links them to your camera if that helps

Go on, is this in the EXIF? if so where should I look? If not, where should I look?

Always shoot in raw, but never give ou the Raw files, that way you can always prove you are the owner.

Nikon sell Image Authentication Software which is used when taking digital photos of crime scenes so they can prove they haven't be tampered with. That's a pretty good way. Anything else can be faked.

I am guessing that putting a mirror in the picture is just not going to cut it?
I am sure you can get watermarking software that hides the info in the file or picture without affecting the image? Long time since I looked though...

Too late for that. 🙁
The photo has been taken and I need to prove that I took it, rockthreegozy has the most promising lead so far.

GrahamS - Member

Nikon sell Image Authentication Software which is used when taking digital photos of crime scenes so they can prove they haven't be tampered with. That's a pretty good way. Anything else can be faked.

Not really looking at image manipulation, more at who was holding the camera, cheers.

Tracker1972 - Member

I am guessing that putting a mirror in the picture is just not going to cut it?
I am sure you can get watermarking software that hides the info in the file or picture without affecting the image? Long time since I looked though...

The mirror might have to be a solution 😕

Watermarking doesn't demonstrate that I actually took the photo.

I do actually have several hundred witnesses, but need something concrete!!!!

Canon BTW.

If you've got any recent version of Photoshop, you can view the EXIF data using Bridge. If not, go download something like [url= http://www.snapfiles.com/get/exifreader.html ]THIS PROG[/url] which does the same thing.

EXIF data is the closect thing to a 'fingerprint' and will tell you the camera make and model, shutter speed and apperture, etc...

EXIF data will tell you make and model of the camera that took it, plus the exact date and time it was taken. But that is all editable and can easily be removed (deliberately or accidentally).

Sorry to get your hopes up- I was referring to EXIF data- but as I now realise it doen't tie it to you.

user-removed - Member

If you've got any recent version of Photoshop, you can view the EXIF data using Bridge. If not, go download something like THIS PROG which does the same thing.

EXIF data is the closect thing to a 'fingerprint' and will tell you the camera make and model, shutter speed and apperture, etc...

But doesn't show that [b]I[/b] was holding a [b]particular[/b] camera..

It's a question of copyright and I need to prove without doubt that I was holding the camera that took the picture... So really I'm looking for info held in the EXIF or somewhere that will link to the exact camera.

Moon on a stick anyone???

rockthreegozy - Member

Sorry to get your hopes up- I was referring to EXIF data- but as I now realise it doen't tie it to you.

No worries. Hopes were up briefly but now back down where they belong. 😆

GrahamS - Member

EXIF data will tell you make and model of the camera that took it, plus the exact date and time it was taken. But that is all editable and can easily be removed (deliberately or accidentally).

So there is nothing to prove who took the photo.

I guess the mirror is the solution...

Do you have the ORIGINAL file that you downloaded from the camera?

If you do AND it is more complete than the copy (ie before edits) then that would prove it.

I wonder if an electronic version of "posting yourself a recorded delivery letter and not opening it" would work?
Post it to a private Flickr account or something, you then have an independent holder of the image who presumably knows when it arrived. At least you can then prove you had possession of the image before anyone else has used it (they cannot post/use/publish it before your upload time).
May not be perfect but certainly free to start with and better than nothing, did you post the image in question on the net before it was taken, may even help in this case?

Were you being paid to take the pictures? That could be a basis for your claim to ownership AFAIK

Original file is the only answer I think - which is why I have a HUGE hard disk and gazillions of DVDs of RAW files kicking about the place 😉

...but if someone steals yer pics, you dont have gazillions of pounds and the time to take them to court anyways ;OP

RobS - Member

Original file is the only answer I think - which is why I have a HUGE hard disk and gazillions of DVDs of RAW files kicking about the place [;-)]

Taking the above responses and putting them into one quote, I have chosen the above. This answers the question, in my opinion, that the people using the photo(s) didn't take it(them), but it doesn't prove that I did!

How the **** do you prove copyright??????

I have already spoken to my lawyer and stated that, not only do I have the original copy, but I could take you to the (more or less) exact spot that any of 30,000 pictures were taken. She seems to think that this might not be good enough for the judge. Aaargh!

Thanks for the help so far.

Dosent Exif and Metadata also contain the exact time/camera and other settings? I also thought it recorded the serial number of the camera as a way of proof, though I might be talking out of my bum!

(I wasent, though its not as easy as I thought!)

good old Wikipedia! - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXIF Check out the problems section at the bottom and you will see that the serial number is stored in the MakerNote details, though this is almost impossible to view according to Wikipedia.

NB: all EXIF data can be removed or rewritten

And to add to that Simon, aparently true EXIF data dosent really exist for RAW files either!

Presuming you have the hi-def original file, irrespective of exif you should be able to prove that yours was the original.

A 100% magnification would show that?

......and yes it could be fabricated, but reasonable doubt and all that.

Civil suit requires a balance of probabilities, not reasonable doubt proof! I'm assuming you just want money not a jail term for the criminal.

Get someone to take a picture of you taking the picture

😉

Sandwich - Member

Civil suit requires a balance of probabilities, not reasonable doubt proof! I'm assuming you just want money not a jail term for the criminal.

I'm also talking about the Spanish legal syatem which isn't quite the same as UK law.
I'm not sure if my lawyer is trying to get me to build an ablsolutely concrete case where there is a high probability of winning or just trying to put me off by asking impossible questions. She isn't a copyright lawyer and therefore isn't up to date with copyright law or the laws around the internet.

She was just asking questions she thought the judge might ask and this one had me stumped. Even with the above advice and suggestions, there are photos and videos of me taking pictures but there are only a few pictures which can be identified as mine due to exclusive access.
Even with a photo of me taking the picture, this is not conclusive that I took the picture. And this is the absurdity.

There is a possibility that the judge won't, according to the lawyer, understand the technology and therefore reject the case.
So I need something that is 100% concrete.

Remember this is Spain, the lawyer also said that if the hosting site is not 100% secure, then the responsiblity may lie there!!!! Which basically means there is no copyright protection in Spain, Screen print anyone??

Good news is I've found the serial number in the EXIF which will tie the photo to the camera... 😀

We're talking about 700+ photos which are being used on a web site without permission, so alot of money..

Also, does anyone know how they are able to capture the last 20 pics I upload? What software they are using? Can I block it? Does the software save a copy of the photo on a hard drive or anywhere else??

Thanks again.

If you have the serial number in the exif that is a good start - I stick a copyright notice and "taken by" notice in there too.

Stopping people downloading? Not sure - I usually use Adobe Flash galleries and can then set the picture to not be downloadable, not that I bother as I only upload low res versions (max 1000px on the long side).

I hate plastering pictures with watermarks - kind of defeats the point of putting them up in the first place. I may look into the invisible ones sometime though since I have had a fair few images harvested in the past 🙁 Usually just the threat of taking action does the trick though.

Were did you upload them too and were are they being used and what for out of interest? I keep a fair few on line as well but all my work is shot in RAW format and are marked with a copyright/creative comons notice.
There was a while ago a law being passed through US courts that would allow image libaries to basicly freely use/sell any image they find on the web for wich any ownership can be proven, not sure if it was passed in the end as i no longer work in the industry.

Simon

Stopping people downloading? Not sure - I usually use Adobe Flash galleries and can then set the picture to not be downloadable, not that I bother as I only upload low res versions (max 1000px on the long side).

I hate plastering pictures with watermarks - kind of defeats the point of putting them up in the first place. I may look into the invisible ones sometime though since I have had a fair few images harvested in the past [:-(] Usually just the threat of taking action does the trick though.

I too hate watermarks, but it still doesn't prove who took the picture. I am at the stage of threatening legal action, but that doesn't solve the problem of saved copies which they will be able to use in the future, pay me for the things and you can use them!!

Were did you upload them too and were are they being used and what for out of interest?

They were uploaded to flickr with an all rights reserved tag, they are pictures of cycle racing and being used on a web site of a cycle shop, I take pictures to sell so I can put food on my table.

have you contacted shop and asked them for payment and they are saying it's not your photo?

[i]Also, does anyone know how they are able to capture the last 20 pics I upload? What software they are using? Can I block it? Does the software save a copy of the photo on a hard drive or anywhere else??[/i]

If you were using flickr. Then presumably just saw one of your photo's clicked on your profile and downloaded the 20 most recent, anyone can do this is the files are publicly visible. Or am I missing something?

have you contacted shop and asked them for payment and they are saying it's not your photo?

They've been sent a letter explaining that they do not have permission to use the photos and been given a reasonable time period to remove them.
They have ignored the request and continue harvesting pictures from the flickr pages!!

They also use my name and give the impression that I am friend of the shop and give authority and permission. Ceeky chunts!

Are they still stealing your pics ? If so then set a honeypot trap and upload some pics which have an invisible watermark inside them. Wait for them to nick them and when they appear on the web then think of a way for someone independent to verify they're yours with the invisible watermark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking

If you were using flickr. Then presumably just saw one of your photo's clicked on your profile and downloaded the 20 most recent, anyone can do this is the files are publicly visible. Or am I missing something?

They are running some sort of software which is able to download the images from the flickr pages automatically within about 10-15 minutes of uploading them.
I am aware that people will download the odd picture for personal use, and this is fine as the images are low resolution. Taking in excess of 700 and putting them on your website then claiming to have some sort of relationship with the photographer is quite frankly extracting the urine.

andywhit - Member

Are they still stealing your pics ? If so then set a honeypot trap and upload some pics which have an invisible watermark inside them. Wait for them to nick them and when they appear on the web then think of a way for someone independent to verify they're yours with the invisible watermark.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking

Watermarking wasn't the issue, the key point was demonstrating that I took the pictures as my lawyer stated that the judge would want some hard evidence that I was the photographer. I could take any picture from here and watermark it. What does that prove?
I think the answer is with the exif info and serial number of the camera. Then it comes down to the judges opinion.

The other way is that the shop has to demonstrate that they do have permission and the relationship with the photographer, which obviously they can't...

Have you tried contacting the shop in question? make them aware of what they are doing, first thing i normaly do (and i have had to once) is contact them and inform them of what they are doing and invoice them 😀 then i would take it further and seek legal assistance.

>I think the answer is with the exif info and serial number of the camera. Then it comes down to the judges opinion.

Indeed, but obviously you could use software to add the serial number of your camera to any old image.

</devil's advocate>

simonk - Member

Have you tried contacting the shop in question? make them aware of what they are doing, first thing i normaly do (and i have had to once) is contact them and inform them of what they are doing and invoice them [:D] then i would take it further and seek legal assistance.

All been done and this is where the original question was raised, my lawyer was playing devil's advocate by asking the question. Further details have been explained above.

Cheers everyone.

simonk has the right approach, maybe ( and it does sound unlikely) they don't know the rules?

andywhit - Member

>I think the answer is with the exif info and serial number of the camera. Then it comes down to the judges opinion.

Indeed, but obviously you could use software to add the serial number of your camera to any old image.

</devil's advocate>

In a nutshell we have the whole problem, je je je!

I was going to say that plenty of sites use auto-harvest/display of any photos you put on flickr simply by parsing search results so I presume these are images that are either a) marked as private or b) being specifically noted as being "their own"?

A few more details might help here.

Have they actually got hold of the [u]full size[/u] originals from Flickr? If so then set your flickr settings to limit the maximum size that your images can be viewed at or only upload smaller versions of the images to start with.

Presumably they are subscribed to your flickr stream, which is how they get the images as soon as you upload them.

coffeeking - Member

I was going to say that plenty of sites use auto-harvest/display of any photos you put on flickr simply by parsing search results so I presume these are images that are either a) marked as private or b) being specifically noted as being "their own"?

I don't understand!!

I know flickr has a feature for dislpaying photos and embedding script in web pages, but as with all flickr stuff the is clear branding on display, these are being taken and included in a website to appear as if the are part of the site in an effort to make the site look more appealing.
The photos are public and I don't think there is any question that copyright has been breached, just a question of demonstating who the photographer is.

Thats what I meant with b) - they're being used as their own rather than the script harvesting them. Was just saying it to point out that the scripts do exist and dont have particularly obvious flickr branding (at least not the ones I've seen).

Indeed RD most people are unaware they are breaking the law and are quite happy and very apologetic i am either lucky or crap so it has only happened once to me and worked out fine.

know flickr has a feature for dislpaying photos and embedding script in web pages, but as with all flickr stuff the is clear branding on display, these are being taken and included in a website to appear as if the are part of the site in an effort to make the site look more appealing.

right click - save as - upload to your own site photo's for web use dont need to be massive files.

Coffeeking i know that one of the biggest image libaries (sorry i cant recall wich one been away from it all for a few years now) is doing this already 🙁
Hope you do get payed or at least the credit you deserve for your work 🙂

Simon.

 

I could be mistaken, but isn't there a notification of when the EXIF data was last modified? If it's unmodified, that might help your case...

Also, this is bang out of order, and as illegal in Spain as it is in the UK. I'd send a strongly worded follow up (via your lawyer if finances permit) explaining that you'd like £20 per pic shown on the site - even include an invoice. It's theft, pure and simple.

I see my pics all the time, being used as FB profile pics and so on. Like you, I have no problem with this, but 700 pics and a false claim to a relationship with you is almost unbelieveable.

However, if you put pics online, this is one of the inevitable consequences - watermarking any future uploads is the only way of ensuring that you get credited - or at least of putting people off downloading them.

have they saved the pictures, or are they linking to them on flickr (like we do in the forum)?

Reason i ask is, could you just upload some photoshopped pictures of the shop staff getting friendly with goats (for example) as replacements?

could make an entertaing few minutes while they take the site down 😛

So who is it then, Simon: Karacol, Bicimania, Mammoth?

Pass 🙁 sorry was about 2 years ago now and i have slept since then 😛 was on the EPUK forums thats all i recall.

if they use your name and imply that you are a friend of the shop when they use the images, does they way they do that not make it fairly clear that they're your photos in the first place? or have i misunderstood?

This may be why the only way you can link photos from fotopic is by going in to your profile to get them.

I could be mistaken, but isn't there a notification of when the EXIF data was last modified?

no, and if there were it could also be falsified

This thread is useless with out pix 😉

Always upload small images say 799pix at 75% compression.

and if you really don't want it out there... DONT POST IT 🙂

Also, this is bang out of order, and as illegal in Spain as it is in the UK. I'd send a strongly worded follow up (via your lawyer if finances permit) explaining that you'd like £20 per pic shown on the site - even include an invoice. It's theft, pure and simple.

Not necessarily so, it depends on how the judge reads the situation. Charging and claiming compensation is my issue.

thisisnotaspoon - Member

have they saved the pictures, or are they linking to them on flickr (like we do in the forum)?

They are linking directly, but I don't know if they have copies saved for future use, I had thought about uploading some porn, but it is flickr and I don't think they'd approve. 😕

mogrim - Member

So who is it then, Simon: Karacol, Bicimania, Mammoth?

¡Que malo eres!! They all have permission to use any pictures and they know how to link. I have a good relationship with most of the shops in Madrid. These cabrones are from further afield.

theflatboy - Member

if they use your name and imply that you are a friend of the shop when they use the images, does they way they do that not make it fairly clear that they're your photos in the first place? or have i misunderstood?

Basically no. If the BNP use your pictures and your name in a friendly way, does that make it OK? Any user must have permisssion, fundamental copyright law. 😉

i'm not saying they have the right to use them, i'm saying you have the proof that they're yours!

These cabrones are from further afield

If it's Morenito give us a shout, I know them all and could go chat...

mogrim - Member

These cabrones are from further afield

If it's Morenito give us a shout, I know them all and could go chat...

How's life with you?
Are you coming to Madrid for the XC World Cup at the end of the month?

theflatboy - Member

i'm not saying they have the right to use them, i'm saying you have the proof that they're yours!

You're right but it might not be enough for the judge, crazy isn't it??

It could be that they have made a flickr 'badge'. It allows you to make a script to link to peoples photos on flickr automatically. It allows you to do it for your own photos (i.e. if you were creating your own web page) or you can use it to search for particular tags in publicly viewable images or to link to groups. You cant use it to see a particular user though.

Go to: http://www.flickr.com/badge.gne to test it - see if you can make a badge that displays one of your contacts photos for example.

Once you have a basic badge, it is possible (particularly with the html version rather than the flash version) to modify the code to strip out any flickr branding etc.

I think the key is that you can make a badge to any image that is publically VIEWABLE. I dont know if the flickr badge generator will therefore ignore any copyright options you have checked and therefore this could provide an avenue for the bike shop to link to your photos.

To see if it is a flickr badge, look at the source code of the web page if you can (right-click and view source). There should be something somewhere with a comment inserted saying its a flickr badge. Or you could remove the tags from a recent photo and see if it also disappears from their site. Or, if all your photos are also added to a particular group, then this person may be making a badge from images in that group... so remove them from that group...

Just an idea - but worth a try.