Ttoby89, I think the commenter meant one that crosses the main part of the image so that it’s entirely a) unmissable and b) unusable.

Ttoby89, I think the commenter meant one that crosses the main part of the image so that it’s entirly a) unmissable and b) unusable.

There is a little Fotoblikke watermark, bottom left, no?

EricaE: You go, girl!!!

Freelancing is hard. No two ways about it. It’s not difficult *at all* for me to put myself in Elke’s shoes, though I’m not a freelance photographer. (Because I do freelance at other things…)

am also thinking that watermarking would be a good alternative in this case and others like it.

I personally don’t think that the photographer overreacted at all.

It’s not easy making a living as a freelance, anything. And that picture must have taken quite a bit of patience and time to capture.

Could she find ways to protect her art better from those who would pilfer without paying, sure. But I can honestly say I would be furious too.

A suggestion would be to put a watermark on the photos posted online, that way people could see the art but not get a clean copy until they send payment.

Hear hear! E to the C.

Ryan, quite a few people overreacted to Elke – it wasn’t necessary.

I can’t blame her for having been upset, and think Ttoby89 makes some very good points.

Over defensive when called stupid? When MORE comments by ellemo keep happening after we say contact Meg and deal with HER because we are powerless to fix the situation? Over defensive? Well, yes, maybe I do get defensive when I see someone insult the intelligence of the users of this site.

And if ellemo or elke what whatever his/her name is doesn’t want his/her pics posted here, it is really his/her loss. We’ll still get our US RDA of Cuteness.

Seriously! Some of us… over defensive, much? “Repeated spam?” As though her aim was to piss CO-users off… please! Comments were just the first thing Elke found – this wasn’t addressed to all of us. We could all stop being so self-centered, taking it to heart and posting indignant and irrelevant comments. This is between Elke and Meg, and I’m sure they’d have sorted it out just fine without interference.

PS: All the “I’ll NEVER buy any of HER stuff any more” is all well (and petty) enough, but I think you’ll find that Elke won’t want her work posted up on CO at all any more, cos of the inflammatory things readers have said. She might even have let Meg put the pic back up if things had been handled well.

@@ Elke @@

Hey, meistens sind die Leute hier sehr cool, aber ich weiss nicht was hier passiert ist Verstehst du alles, was geschrieben ist? Ich finde deine Foto sehr hübsch, and es wäre sehr cool wenn Cute Overload es behalten könnte, aber ich verstehe dass du es jetzt vielleicht nicht willst… Schade. Viel Glück!

“Someone merely had to right-click the picture, save it and then send it off in the email.” Actually, if you go to the site and right click, you get a message that says “Copyright by Fotoblicke,” which means someone had to make an effort to circumvent that in order to copy the photo.

Actually, that isn’t entirely true Li. Yes, you do get the copyright message; however, you are still able to save the image by using right-click. Well, at least if you’re using FireFox that is.