Re: czaphotography.com website up

From: Camden Hardy <camden_at_hardyphotography.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:05:42 -0600 (MDT)
Message-id: <49483.153.90.170.145.1150999542.squirrel@webmail.hardyphotography.net>

Congrats to Loris and (and yes, it was a joke). Kyle had the method I was
thinking of, so I'll give you both 10 points. They can be redeemed at
www.awholelotofnothing.com (hmm...not taken yet...I may have to register
that one). Enjoy.

Honestly, I originally had no intention of making it difficult/impossible
for viewers to capture images from the site...I just happened to discover
that Lightbox prevents right-clicking the image after it pops up.

Camden Hardy

camden@hardyphotography.net
http://www.hardyphotography.net

On Thu, June 22, 2006 11:25 am, Ben Coburn wrote:
> Um... I think this was a joke to begin with. But seriously, if you are
> going to get that worked up about digital reproductions don't post
> images in an online gallery. For that matter don't show your work in
> galleries either, you never know when someone will walk in with a
> digital SLR (or camera-phone).
>
> PS. It does not take more than ~30 seconds for anyone with a little
> understanding of how HTML works to lookup the URLs to the images and
> load them directly. For example
> "http://www.hardyphotography.net/img/photos/chinatown/02-Photo-
> Supplies.jpg".
>
> Regards, Ben Coburn
>
> On Jun 22, 2006, at 9:44 AM, Camden Hardy wrote:
>
>> Don's right...it's amazing what you can do with images from the web.
>> This
>> is one of the advantages to the Lightbox technology used in Chris' site
>> (and mine too). It makes it much harder for people to save the images
>> to
>> their computer.
>>
>> 10 points for the first one to figure out how to do it ;)
>>
>>
>> Camden Hardy
>>
>> camden@hardyphotography.net
>> http://www.hardyphotography.net
>>
>> On Thu, June 22, 2006 9:51 am, Don Bryant wrote:
>>> Actually Loris I can uprez with pretty good quality from screen
>>> captures.
>>> As
>>> an experiment I did just that with a famous photogs website and using
>>> PS
>>> bicubic I had amazingly good results when printed as an 11x14 inkjet
>>> print
>>> using QTR.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Loris Medici [mailto:mail@loris.medici.name]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 10:56 AM
>>> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
>>> Subject: RE: czaphotography.com website up
>>>
>>> Wow! Don, what interpolation program are you using? Must be a very
>>> good
>>> one since you can make good quality (not instantly obvious that it's a
>>> repro) inkjet prints from a 400 - 500 pixel image (in the longest
>>> dimension) ;)
>>>
>>> Seriously, according to you is there the risk of someone making good
>>> quality and reasonably sized repros (see the criteria above) from
>>> 500-600 pixels images one shows in the web? According to my knowledge
>>> this pretty unlikely.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards & TIA,
>>> Loris.
>>>
>>> P.S. The old/plain Print-Scrn trick works, therefore I take your
>>> comment
>>> as a warning to Christina...
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Don Bryant [mailto:dstevenbryant@mindspring.com]
>>> Sent: 22 Haziran 2006 Peršembe 17:18
>>> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
>>> Subject: RE: czaphotography.com website up
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah but I can't capture the images so I can print them on my inkjet
>>> printer!
>>>
>>> Don Bryant
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on 06/22/06-12:11:36 PM Z

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : 07/28/06-08:55:14 AM Z CST