I noticed a post about the pictures, that they take on the cruise, do not buy more than 1 of each picture, buy one and take it to your local walmart or cvs they all have the digital scanners to make a nice picture , for about 5.00 , just thought i's add to that post
Some photo outlets will tell you they won't duplicate photos that have been taken by professional photographers due to copyright issues. I had this problem when I tried to have one of our formal photos made into Christmas Cards last fall. I have had the discussion with several photo outlets that photos purchased on the ship ore NOT copyrighted. Anything that is copyrighted has to have a little c with a circle around it along with the year the copyright was issued and the name of the copyright holder. Photos purchased on the ship don't have this so don't let the photo employees tell you otherwise.
To avoid any problems all you have to do is call Carnivals Customer Service - tell them the sailing and that you would like a photo release. They will send it out right away. Don't let the photo place keep the letter - as you can use it several times - even for different cruises - after all the person behind the counter doesn't know what ship the pictures came from.
Anything that is copyrighted
> has to have a little c with a circle around it
> along with the year the copyright was issued and
> the name of the copyright holder.
As an erstwhile professional photographer and sometime free-lance writer, let me state that the above is NOT true. The creator of any work is automatically the copyright owner, regardless of markings on the work itself, unless it is 'work-for-hire' -- that is, you are paid a salary/stipend for creating the work at someone else's request. Most professionals who worry over such matters because their livelihoods depend on it DO mark their work, because it would be impossible for them to collect copy-release fees or other followup business, without making themselves known. However, it is not the marking that forms the copyright, it's the creation.
So, any photo outlet that asks for copyright permission is doing its job -- though, in the case of Carnival, I doubt they're going to sue anyone who manages to get a photo copied anyway.
What is the distinguishing feature to make this picture appear to be a copywrited piece of work. Everyone takes pictures. Because you are in a Tux or on a cruise ship,is that what is to make the picture appear to be a protectec piece of work. Do the photo counter walmart workers really think someone in authority isgoing to come get them. Come on people, if they don't want to do the work, take your buisiness elsewhere. For what we are charged for the pictures the cruise line should forget about any photo protection and be glad we spend our money with them. As the previous poster said, look for the selfservice kiosk or a friend with a good scanner. Buisinesses sure have learned how to regulate and price themselves out of more business.
Better yet if you are taking formal picture let the photogragher take the picture with their camara and then pull out your camera and nicly ask if they can take the picture with your camera. Most will do this for you so you can eitjher by the ships picture or spend up to $10 on your own.
It works you save up to $20 for those wonderful 8X10 photos the carnival gets you to purchase
The ship has a sticker that is on the back of the picture. I had some copie from my last cruise and had no problem. I just called CArnival and they gladly sent me a letter saying it was ok. I had lots of copies made for my family and friends. I just made copies of the letter and kept the original.
Several of us that cruise together, get different pictures then copy and share.
I think every one was missing the point, my walmart has a DO IT YOURSELF photo maker its a little kodak stand that scans your photo and you print out however many copies and whatever sizes you want... cvs has them most drug stores have them
I signed up to use the forum just to reply to this thread.
What the thread originator is suggesting is unlawful. Not county court unlawful, not cruise lines slap you on the wrist unlawful, but Supreme Court unlawful. Chains like Wal Mart and K Mart have been sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars for infringing on copyrights of others, and while a different media I think we all know what happened in the wake of Napster vs. the RIAA.
The Supreme Court ruled in the 1970s that photographers were not actually employees of their customers (as was the usual arrangement until then) and that as such, artists such as photographers could hold control over the way their work was distributed and sold. This 'copyright' restricts how other business entities, such as Wal Mart, can charge for service related to the reprinting of a photographer's work. The illegal part of your suggestion is that Wal Mart makes money for reprinting and the cruise line does not. If you wish to make a copy for yourself or for 'Fair Use' (another boring explanation entirely), then go right ahead, but don't trick people into thinking that your practice is acceptable and that the retailers are being unreasonable by obeying the law.
How Things SHOULD Work-
The proper way to go about making reprints at a retail lab is to call the customer services 800 number and request a photo release. So long as you have the usual cruise photos and not, say, wedding photos from the ship photographers the service # staff should be able to mail you a release which you will need to bring with you to the lab.
I buy one of each picture, scan them on my scanner and print out for family and friends. Sometimes I put them online so everyone can view them and select the ones they want, all free of charge. I also buy different size photo paper from a warehouse club, much less expensive this way.
I have a friend that went on a cruise last year, and when she went to Walmart to make copies of her pictures with the do it yourself machine, after she was finished and went to the counter to pay for them, as they were counting the pictures they told her she couldn't buy them, that it was againist the law. So....they tossed them in the trash.
I had read on here awhile back about getting the release from Carnival so she did that and went back out, did her pictures on the do it yourself machine and went she went to pay for them showed them her paper and had no problem. I'm going to get the paper just in case I have a problem also. If I was any of you, I'd go ahead and get it too, just to be on the safe side. Have a great day!
Ditto what Munzy77 said-- you may be able to PRINT the photos yourself at the kiosks, but don't be surprised if you get some grief when you try to pay for them. This has happened to me on a few occasions at various retailers.
As for the little copyright mark, I think the clerks are supposed to see the back of the original photo-- it would be considered "copyrighted" if the writing on the back of the photo paper stated as such. If the back of the photo paper is blank, then should be OK to copy. DH and I had some photos taken at Sears a few years ago, and on the back (in that hard-to-read grayscale printing), the photos say "Professional Images are Copyright Protected." If your photo is entirely blank on the back (not sure if Carnival's are or not), I don't think a clerk can prevent you from copying them, because they would have no way of knowing who did the photo.
Oddly enough, I just peeked at the back of one of our extremely-expensive, professionally-done wedding pictures and it says nothing. Hmmm...
> What the thread originator is suggesting is
Not really. I work for a company that specializes in duplication of CD's and DVD's etc. While the photo store is correct in being cautious in duplicating anything that they "suspect" to be copywritten material. It is not an issue if the person uses the store provided scanner. This would be the same as if I walked into a store that duplicated CD's and handed them a CD that was copy written, they should refuse to do that copy. However, if I were to rent a duplicator in their store and made that copy for myself, "backup copy" then I do not believe the copy is illegal or would the store be at fault. Now I will admit this is my understanding of copyrights as it pertains to CD's and DVD's not sure if it is differant for photos but since those scanners are in place I wouldn't imagine it would be differant. The negative would be that the owner of the photo would be liable for copyright infringement in that case.
When we bought our pictures on the Sensation we were told (or I read in the photo room) that the photos had watermarks that would emerge on any scanned copy. Of course I had to test it and of course they scanned and printed perfectly. Just wandering if anyone else heard of or saw that statement.
Giles, it is illegal to make money from someone elses copyright. Does that make sense? By paying Wal Mart (or whoever) instead of the owner of the copyright, you are breaking the law. Does every copyright holder catch every infringement? Not by a long shot. Does every copyright holder pursue legal action against offenders? No. But thats your own roll of the dice. Fact is, it is illegal for a retailer to charge you money for those reproductions. Are you responsible too? Yes, but who has deeper pockets, you or Sam Walton? Now you understand why these clerks are leary of professional work, which by the way, only has to 'appear' professional... it does not necessarily require a stamp seal or other mark. Clerks look for certain quality of print paper, 'pro' poses, and 'pro' light setups to determine what they will or will not print if that makes it any clearer Lori.
Well fortunately we have our own scanner/printer so I don't have to worry about going to a kiosk to copy a photo... But if I brought a picture to CVS to copy, and that picture had NO notation anywhere on it that it was copyrighted, and the clerk refused to allow me to copy it because they "guessed" it was professionally done, I think I would have a fit. I am by no means a professional photographer, but it IS a hobby of mine and I take a lot of pride in taking really nice photos, so really, how would a clerk know?
Without some sort of copyright mark, I really don't see how a clerk could refuse reproduction of a photo... if the photographer doesn't care enough about his/her own work to bother putting a copyright mark of some sort on it, then why should I worry about reproducing it? in a similar argument, if I leave my car unlocked and my purse on the seat, if someone steals my purse, I bear at least part of the responsibility because I didn't take even the most basic means to secure it. So no, the "it just has to APPEAR professional" argument doesn't fly in my opinion.
> Giles, it is illegal to make money from someone
> elses copyright.
That is absolutely true.
> By paying Wal Mart (or whoever) instead of the owner of the
> copyright, you are breaking the law.
> Fact is, it is illegal for a retailer to charge you money for those reproductions.
This is my point, you are not paying Walmart for making a copy of the material, you are paying Walmart for the use of the machine, that is where the distinction is. The person who has the print and uses the machine in violation of any copyright is the person that would be responsible for misuse not Walmart or whoever.
Personally I find it a load of crap for someone to take my photo and retain the rights to copy that picture. For that reason I have no interest in getting "professional" photos taken by large photo houses. I prefer small photographers who don't have such a ridiculous policy. It is my picture of either me or my family so I should be able to copy and distribute it to whomever I like, now I agree that I should not be allowed to sell those photos. If I do not have such rights then you do not have my business. Then again, I am a man and such things fall low on my priority list.
Anyway, if anyone is feeling a tinge of uncertainty about if they are breaking the law or not, it is very easy to get a release form from Carnival.