Selling a rendered Image

Hi all,

sorry for my bad english.

I found some posts about the selling, but i have problems to understand the answers. Sorry.

My question: Can i sell a rendered image from FF?

Thanks a lot...

Thank you. Is this answer officially? Or must a moderator answer?

ok. How can I make a credit? Mention the name or donate money?

ok. I make my own Filter... Thanks Lars

Thank you all...

I agree that you are allowed to sell the rendered images, and you have the right to do it and there is no copyright on any of the filters results, but there is also a moral topic IF you are going to sell the results from Texture filters without any modification made by you, as is not good to benefit and get profit from the hard work of others and you would earn money without doing nothing to create what you are selling

Quote

The Effects filters give you the final result already made, and there is NO creation done from your part, so this is all the work from the author and would be good that you mention and credit the author and do not tell that this is your own work The Texture Filters involve adding your own images, and on most filters that will depend on one or more source images there is no direct creation made by the author of the filter, just the filter work, and here you do not have to credit the author because the source images would be yours and not from the filter author

Authors of the filters will not like that you sell and get profit from their own work made with Effects filters and without modifying nothing, even if it is allowed by the law of filter forge.

See more here --> Violation of my rights

SORRY, THE TEXT ABOVE IS WRONG, SEE BELOW FOR THE RIGHT ONE

Quote
Sign Guy Sounds to me like you've got it backwards

OH YES!!

I have put it wrongly and is just the other way round I mean that the Effects filters are really the Texture filters.

Quote

RIGHT WRITTEN TEXT HERE The Texture filters give you the final result already made, and there is NO creation done from your part, so this is all the work from the author and would be good that you mention and credit the author and do not tell that this is your own work The Effects Filters involve adding your own images, and on most filters that will depend on one or more source images there is no direct creation made by the author of the filter, just the filter work, and here you do not have to credit the author because the source images would be yours and not from the filter author

Sorry that I have put the texts in previous post wrongly, I was confusing both filters categories

Quote
Sign Guy But when a user, such as myself, uses a filter such as Wood, and spends several man days inserting colors and grain patterns observed in photos to create a unique set of woodgrain textures that are superior to the presets of the filter

But then you are modifying and creating something yourself based on the filter already given, so you work to create better results than the presets included and you are not using the default settings and configuration, so then you have made your own work and then is not only what the author have already done.

Although is allowed, what is bad from my point of view (and think others too) is that someone could just download a texture filter and without doing nothing to modify anything from the filter and just using one of the available presets, renders it and then sell it.

I purchased FF a couple of years ago with the intention of selling anything and everything it produces. If some of you people are peeved off that sellers don't give you credit then stop contributing filters to the filter library!

I can find no restrictions on selling the output...so some folks need to stop whining.

I also don't need to hear any blah-blah-blah as I am a 12 year photo pro with a library of over 800,000 images I have shot myself. I also have a decent size library of photo art that I have created myself with the aid of filters etc. Yes, I do pursue copyright violators when it's prudent for me to do so.

Back to FF...some you people need to stop submitting filters if you don't want people to sell the output created. I don't care of it's a filter or a straight preset of a texture... One more time...if you don't want people to use and sell the textures and/or the preset textures without credit then stop submitting them!

I don't mean to sound so harsh but if I donate images to be used in projects I don't whine and cry when people profit from the projects without crediting me. It was a donation...

The filter creator does not control what I do with any and/or all of my output.

I don't credit Adobe when I use stock presets, buttons, voices and templates in their products because it's not required. I appreciate the donors to the filter library, really I do...in-fact it's why I paid FF a couple hundred dollars --> to use the filters commercially without having to give credit.

Best of luck to all!

@ Casual Pixels

I certainly did not miss the difference between Adobe and FF. Adobe has user submitted tool libraries just like FF does...and yes, some of those tools are free to use. So yes, I do see some equivalencies. Not to mention the fact that a HUGE selection of FREE third party actions, filters, and presets exist --> and they are widely available on the internet.

Furthermore, the big thing you seem to be missing/overlooking/disregarding is the cold hard fact that FF charges us money to license the software and gain access to the filters!

@ The Community

IMHO it's the FF model business model that is causing the distress....not me. I paid my money to use the FF software and the FF library and it is FF that makes the money. As I understand it...prominent filter authors can get free copies of the software for their submissions...as well as recognition within the community which obviously is worth something as well.

I even paid money for a backup filter library...so FF makes money on the filters again!

Yes, I suppose my post does expose the ungrateful, selfish side of this business...but IMHO FF is a tool to use commercially...it's not an artwork that needs to have it's author's credited.

Am I grateful for the tool? Sure. Am I grateful for the filters? Sure. It's why I paid my money to FF! I am grateful to FF for making the software and the library available as it is.

Am I grateful for Photoshop? Sure. Do I credit filter, action and plugin makers when I run the filters, actions and plugins with built in presets? Of course not!

Artists are emotional peeps...that's why I suggest they stop submitting filters if they can't handle what happens on the business side --> after they have made a submission.

I suspect many users of FF do not submit filters because they don't want to share, others because they can't create good filters in a timely manner, or they can't create them at all. This is exactly why I purchased the FF tool and access to the library. I want to use the output it generates quickly and hassle free.

Thousands upon thousands of different tools are available and I have yet to purchase one that makes me credit the contributors when I use it.

If the Filter Forge people did not prefer this model they would find a way to switch to a different model. If they had an easy way to do it another way I am sure they would... but as I see it, this model is one of the big reasons are why they are successful.

I would love to create a cool filter to share - but I am not skilled enough, nor do I have the time to do create a unique filter. Years ago I created some decent Photoshop actions that I gladly and freely shared. As a photographer and someone decently skilled in color, art, editing, and general knowledge I have contributed thousands of posts sharing photos, tips and tidbits within the photographic community.

I would support paying for FF forge filters if their was a way it could be done legally. Sure I would gladly pay a little extra for really good filters. But please do remember that I paid Filter Forge a lot of money for a license to use the software and use the filters. Certainly someone profits greatly from the filters...that someone is Filter Forge.

Bottom line is I get a bit tired of reading posts from "artists" that are acting like someone stole their greatest copyrighted work from a wall in a museum, reprinted it, and then made a fortune from it without compensation or credit. This is not what is happening here. People contribute the filters to the FF library willingly and voluntarily so they should expect that anything people output from it can be used commercially without credit.

Certainly if I were to license an individual picture from a photographer or an agency that required credit (such as some editorial stock) I would gladly credit as required. The problem is this is an entirely different animal and the rendered output from Filter Forge does not require credit.

Would I ever credit Filter Forge or it's contributors? Possibly...a nice blog post, or an article, or something else which would recognize some of the best contributors with a link to Filter Forge. But guess what, the readers may actually purchase a copy of FF and then some of you super whiner "artists" may start whining again when the credit topic comes up...and, uh-oh...FF again makes a profit on your filter submissions. Geesh, I figure FF has affiliates and low and behold even those affiliates end up profiting from the massive filter library.

So it all comes back to FF...they picked this business/software model and they presented this software with the filter library for our use...no credits required.

It's a tool people...some people use it for fun and others paid their money to use it commercially. If I had to be extra careful about how I use my output and issue credits when I use the tool --> I have would not have purchased it in the first place.

Yes, here I will work in a BIG thank you to the forum users that read this post who have contributed some of the cool filters in the FF library. THANK YOU!

If this issue is so bothersome to you please feel free to try to negotiate a better deal with FF --> or stop submitting your filters to the library.

I have fought piracy for many years and I have spent a significant number of hours and weeks tracking down pirated photos and major pirates...and I have busted many, believe me. In-fact the majority of the pirates I have busted have involved images pirated from my peers, and not my own. I believe in copyrights and copyright protection probably more than 99.999% of the people on this earth and always will.

The fact of the matter here is FF sells us a license to the software that gives us access to the filter library. They make the money and we get to use the generated output as we wish, without the need to credit the filter authors.

Best of luck to all.

Regards,

-don

I think the moral issue here is that if you have invested tens of hours in creating a filter and see someone else taking the credit for it, it's going to be demoralizing.

I agree that if you have a problem with others using your filters as they wish, you should really consider whether to submit at all. There are other ways of contributing to the community, sharing ideas and techniques.

Quote
SpacedOut: Bottom line is I get a bit tired of reading posts from "artists" that are acting like someone stole their greatest copyrighted work from a wall in a museum, reprinted it, and then made a fortune from it without compensation or credit

So why are you worrying about the illegal use of your photographs? All you did was push a button, the landscape or whatever was already there. See?

Quote
So why are you worrying about the illegal use of your photographs? All you did was push a button, the landscape or whatever was already there. See?

The difference is there was no contract with nature....there is with Filter Forge. If you put tens of hours of work in a filter and you don't want others to use it, don't submit it. It isn't much more factual, or simple then that.

@ Marder

Thank you...have a great day!

Quote
So why are you worrying about the illegal use of your photographs? All you did was push a button, the landscape or whatever was already there. See?

@ Velho

No, I don't see because what you are implying is absolutely ludicrous! It's a terrible analogy, if that is what it was meant to be...

Obviously you don't have a full understanding of copyrights or photography! Unless I am contracted by a third party the images I create are mine to sell or display, they are copyrighted to me, and I own them. I did not steal them or buy them from someone else. I am the person that spent thousands of dollars in equipment, I am the one that found the scene, I am the one spent time and effort to get to the scene, I am the one that found the angle and the proper light, I am the one that made many camera adjustments and set the controls on the camera ---> which is some cases is a ton of adjustments...iso, white balance, shutter speed, aperture, exposure compensation, sharpness, compression, format, color temp, etc. etc. etc. I am also the one that took the time to develop the image digitally, and I am the one that edited/retouched/cropped the image, and I am also the one that took the time and energy to display the image.

I created the image with my resources...the image is automatically copyrighted to me and nobody else. I can guarantee you that I have hundreds of thousands of images that you could not make just by pushing a button. You would need quality gear that is great in low light, has short shutter lag, you would also need great glass (lenses), you would also need to posses the skills to operate the gear, and you would also have to have an eye for art and/or the subject at hand...rule of thirds, prejudging subjects (ie: sports photograaphy, action photography), color, mood, etc. etc. etc. You would also need a press pass, an event pass, or paid entry in many cases.

Lastly...since I am selling licenses to use my images I do not want my images plastered all over the net by pirates devaluing my work or worse. This hurts both parties involved...myself and my paying customers.

Quote
Let's say a professional photographer creates an online gallery. Someone downloads a photograph and posts it on facebook claiming he took the picture. He doesn't see any harm in taking credit for other people's work, it's just a random pic for him.

@ Velho

I am a professional photographer and I have had tens of thousands of images online for over a decade. The situation you describe is copyright infringement and fraud by the person that pirated the image plain and simple.

It's worse than straight piracy because the thief is claiming credit for the work. Random image? No...it was image created by someone else that owns the copyright on it. It harms the photographer and possibly third party editors and agencies as well, and it's straight up fraud.

Stealing from a pro photographer is just as bad as stealing groceries from your local grocery store. In-fact it can be much worse because US copyright law allows up to $150,000 in damages per image per infringement in the worst cases, and on top of that the infringer can be subject to criminal penalties (jail time) if they have removed or altered an existing copyright notice.

The person that does not see any harm in stealing a pro photographers work and claiming the work as his own is an idiot and a thief and he is breaking the law bigtime!

Quote
This is a gross undervaluation of the talent, the effort and the skills required to produce quality photographs.

@ Velho

Bravo! That statement I agree with 100% and to be honest it surprises me that you made a couple of those prior statements! Stealing pro photos and claiming them as your own and using licensed software are two entirely different matters!!

You must remember the filter authors submitted the filters freely and willingly to the library, and while the filter author owns the copyright on the filter, the end users are NOT required to credit the authors. This is the price the authors paid for submitting the filters. No pro photographer submits their photos to have them stolen by thieves that claim the images as their own!

Now back to the Filter Forge output. We paid the money...some of us paid hundreds of dollars to use FF and the filter library and when we do use it --> the rendered output belongs to the us...not to the person that submitted the filter. It should be plainly obvious to you that this is why many of us pay the money to use FF.

I will close this post with a quote from Jane/Djekki - Filter Forge Inc.

Quote
All the renders you make in Filter Forge is your intellectual property. Filter authors hold the copyright to the filter files proper (.ffxml files). Jane/Djekki

Take care.

Thanks to everyone for the discussion.

The most direct comparative endeavor to the FF filter artists arrangement I am familiar with is the Adobe Exchange. There one will find all sorts of freely downloadable finished Actions, Styles and other time saving quality enhancements. Most are freely donated and there is no expectation of anything in return. Others may be demos offered in the hope some will purchase a paid version.

With a directly competitive product we now use for most of our seamless tile work that will remain nameless, licensees receive an extensive library of filters developed by the publisher that are both high in quality and consistency along with access to a large, free and royalty free library of photographs. Additional filters are shared in their forums (permission of author required) and there are no continuing issues of resentment, theft, infringement etc. when an image goes on sale or suggestions of any need to give credit.

I tip my hat to the Filter Forge team for creating a high quality, useful product ... but I also turn a big thumbs down on their business model when it comes to how their filter library is developed. It is a source of resentment and has resulted in a cluttered library, inconsistent in quality with, IMHO, one out of ten filters actually being good enough to be in the library.

Quote
Mardar wrote: Comparing copyright laws to tool use is absurd. Stealing someones render (or photo) is still stealing. But using the tool that makes renders to make your own render is not.

You are putting words in my mouth, never said anything like that, never implied anything like that.

Quote
SpacedOut It's getting very old and it's quite clear if you read my posts

Therein lies the rub. A couple of friendly, no rudeness intended, suggestions to help with that:

1. Take a lesson fr om Twitter and lim it the length of your posts. Your posts are incredibly long and jump around more than many will be able to or are willing to try to follow.

2. Save the personal attacks for somewhere else. For me they reduce the credibility of the poster.

3. Do your editing once and be done. Those of us who subscribe to an interesting thread receive email notifications of any new post or edit of an existing post. I have, for example, 17 notifications filling my inbox of the edits you have made to your last post starting at 12:09 PM EST and continuing for the next 20 minutes.

Quote
In-fact some amateur and rookie photographers believe that having their images stolen is a badge of honor, a validation of just how good his or her photo skills are.

That crossed my mind once as a marketing point. My images are so wonderful that people risk an eternity in hell, imprisonment, massive fines and my own wrath just to steal em. LOL

Or short version of marketing point. Images so good, people steal em.

Quote
That crossed my mind once as a marketing point. My images are so wonderful that people risk an eternity in hell, imprisonment, massive fines and my own wrath just to steal em. LOL Or short version of marketing point. Images so good, people steal em.

@ ddaydreams

For sure. And to further that point the sad thing is when you put a credit or logo on your images it just tells the pirates where to come to quickly and easily get more good images without paying for them!

If people think image credits bring them a lot of business and/or fame they are sadly mistaken...credits will you bring you a small amount of business over time but they will bring hoards upon hoards of people pilfering your images and/or stealing your bandwidth!

Regards

Quote
For the record, we do post an acknowledgement on our own tile pages which can be viewed at the bottom of the page HERE. I'd be willing to bet that you cannot show me a web page of a seller (not a filter author) who does even that much.

@ Sign Guy

I notice that you did not mention the fact that along with the acknowledgement you have posted you are using an included affiliate link to make money from Filter Forge sales!

You dirty dog...selling renders and the program too! Good going, sign guy...hope your profits are large and your success is abundant.

Quote

SpaceOut A few friendly suggestions for you. #1 Unsubscribe fr om the thread if you don't like edit updates. But gee whiz Dad! I was interested in what was being posted. And it isn't even bedtime yet! #2 Start calling out the people that start the personal attacks. I respond as I see fit. You don't seem to be in need of a defender. #4 Start calling out the people that beg for credits and give poor or improper advice. I fail to see where the first part of your suggestion has any merit and I fail to see wh ere the second part has anything to do with the content of this thread except, perhaps, in your mind. #5 Start calling out the people that are ranting and raving on ethics and morality...you can start by calling out a few of the long time members. OK! Consider yourself called out. #6 Don't worry about the length of other user's posts. One can lead a horse to water but one cannot make it drink. #7 If you think my posts jump around too much for you then don't read them. But Dad, what if you said something worth reading and I missed it? #8 Try to stay on topic...the topic is not me...the topic is/was "selling a rendered image". This thread has been going off topic since about post #16. Your rants and ramblings begged a comment in hopes you might see the inconvenience and difficulty to others of your posting and editing style ... since you seemed to be finding fault with others not understanding what you thought you had said. To that extent my post was on topic. #9 Don't compare twitter with a forum... they are two entirely different animals. Didn't think I did so, but in either venue brevity is a positive. Twitter simply requires it. #10 The "It's getting old" comment is/was not a personal attack --> but your post to me could be considered a personal attack. For better or for worse, it was how I read it in the context of your post. #11 You don't write the rules of this forum...please keep that in mind. Friendly suggestions seem somehow different than writing the rules. But hey, you're right again Dad. #12 Start replying to folks that actually make personal attacks...like the guy that "attacked" me by saying I missed the difference between Adobe and Filter Forge --> when in-fact it was he that failed to see the similarities. I told him that Adobe does have user user submitted tool libraries which you repeated later in the thread. Once again, I am not here to be your defender. What I do or don't do has nothing to do with what you do or don't do. Man, that's a lot of do! #13 Don't try to play moderator unless you are moderating yourself...as I see it you failed to reply to many posts that could have used a comment from you...but instead you chose to "attack" me after another user called me ignorant. Offering a suggestion is a far cry from moderating or attacking you. #14 Learn to be fair...don't try to be a forum big shot. The pot just called the kettle black. #15 A bit of a repeat but I will say it again for emphasis --> Start calling out the self absorbed morality police when they give confusing or incorrect advice to other forum users. Snaps to attention and smartly salutes. #16 Your name with your full company name at the bottom each post could be considered self serving spam by many forums and I find it a bit over the top. You have every right to form your own opinions however incorrect they may be. #17 Keep up the good work by repeating what I have already posted...ie: it is the FF business model that is causing some of the resentment from the authors that think they deserve more credit and praise and the Adobe Exchange stuff. Thanks again Dad! It's a shame you weren't here when lots of discussion took place by those who were directly affected by the matter. #18 Worry about your own credibility...in-fact you have lost some of that credibility with me when you chose to call out my post and not some of the others. A friendly suggestion is not calling you out. Methinks you doth protest too much. #19 Take a chill pill...nobody eat your lunch or stole your birthday. I will if you will. #20 Sometimes friendly advice is hard to give in a forum setting...especially in the way you are trying to go about it. You have never spoken to me, you don't know me, you have never replied to any of my previous posts, and you did not respond when I was "attacked" or people responded to me with inappropriate comments. You may want to consider use emoticons, private messages, or email when giving friendly advice to people you don't know and have not communicated with previously. Have a nice day. This is true but one can only try or not try. Nuff said.

@ Sign Guy

Quote

A few friendly suggestions for you. #1 Unsubscribe fr om the thread if you don't like edit updates. But gee whiz Dad! I was interested in what was being posted. And it isn't even bedtime yet! An easy solution is to drag a shortcut to the thread to your desktop...quite simple but very effective. Another trick is use a provider like Gmail for your forum alerts...it automatically threads the edits to a single expandable line. To be honest I've made 10-20K posts to forums and I have never seen one that emails edit updates. It's just my opinion but if it were my forum I probably would not have that feature enabled....most edits are nothing more than typo corrections. #2 Start calling out the people that start the personal attacks. I respond as I see fit. You don't seem to be in need of a defender. I do as well...and nope, have never needed any defenders. #4 Start calling out the people that beg for credits and give poor or improper advice. I fail to see where the first part of your suggestion has any merit and I fail to see wh ere the second part has anything to do with the content of this thread except, perhaps, in your mind. I guess you missed POST #4 and the later spaceray link (and information on that linked thread). I also guess you may have missed much of the rest of the banter on this thread. Oh well... #5 Start calling out the people that are ranting and raving on ethics and morality...you can start by calling out a few of the long time members. OK! Consider yourself called out. I have never ranted and raved on ethics and morality...ranted and raved on morality and ethics??? Give me a break! If you want to call people out for ranting and raving call out spaceray and a few of the others out. #6 Don't worry about the length of other user's posts. One can lead a horse to water but one cannot make it drink. smile:( Having a problem staying on topic again, eh? #7 If you think my posts jump around too much for you then don't read them. But Dad, what if you said something worth reading and I missed it? That would be your loss...maybe you should consider a remedial reading comprehension course? #8 Try to stay on topic...the topic is not me...the topic is/was "selling a rendered image". This thread has been going off topic since about post #16. Your rants and ramblings begged a comment in hopes you might see the inconvenience and difficulty to others of your posting and editing style ... since you seemed to be finding fault with others not understanding what you thought you had said. To that extent my post was on topic. Sounds like a personal problem...and this thread has been swerving off topic since about post #4. Not to mention that post contains incorrect information directly related to the thread topic. I don't think it's a comprehension problem...I think some here have a different opinion on how much credit they deserve when users render FF output. Those opinions would be incorrect since FF output requires no credit. #9 Don't compare twitter with a forum... they are two entirely different animals. Didn't think I did so, but in either venue brevity is a positive. Twitter simply requires it. Not exactly...many forums I belong to frown upon short posts and hit and run posters...in-fact one of those forums does not allow mobile users to post for that exact reason. I post what I feel is necessary...don't read it if it's too many words for you. #10 The "It's getting old" comment is/was not a personal attack --> but your post to me could be considered a personal attack. For better or for worse, it was how I read it in the context of your post. Sounds like another personal problem...my suggestion is that you read the posts that I have replied to and then carefully read my entire reply to that post. #11 You don't write the rules of this forum...please keep that in mind. Friendly suggestions seem somehow different than writing the rules. But hey, you're right again Dad. I guess you are in need of a father figure, eh? You told me to be more moderate in my edits and comments. Nuff said. #12 Start replying to folks that actually make personal attacks...like the guy that "attacked" me by saying I missed the difference between Adobe and Filter Forge --> when in-fact it was he that failed to see the similarities. I told him that Adobe does have user user submitted tool libraries which you repeated later in the thread. Once again, I am not here to be your defender. What I do or don't do has nothing to do with what you do or don't do. Man, that's a lot of do! You seem to have a strange selective posting style...and nobody asked you to be my defender, I just find it quite strange that you chose to post "suggestions" for me and skipped over many questionable posts. Oh well... #13 Don't try to play moderator unless you are moderating yourself...as I see it you failed to reply to many posts that could have used a comment fr om you...but instead you chose to "attack" me after another user called me ignorant. Offering a suggestion is a far cry fr om moderating or attacking you. Again...you told me to be more moderate in my replies and edits. Keyword --> moderate. #14 Learn to be fair...don't try to be a forum big shot. The pot just called the kettle black. Laughing out loud on that one....I've posted on only one thread here and I have not made suggestions directly to other users on how to post and what to post. I don't have a fancy avatar, or my company name in my profile and on all of my posts. To be honest I think you pulled that reply fr om the "random" kettle. #15 A bit of a repeat but I will say it again for emphasis --> Start calling out the self absorbed morality police when they give confusing or incorrect advice to other forum users. Snaps to attention and smartly salutes. I was a military man but no need to salute...please just try to pay closer attention to what some of the other users are posting. #16 Your name with your full company name at the bottom each post could be considered self serving spam by many forums and I find it a bit over the top. You have every right to form your own opinions however incorrect they may be. Incorrect opinions they are not...I belong to some of the largest forums on earth and many of those forums DO NOT allow sig lines and/or company names. That's the facts jack. Obviously they must be allowed here, but I have noticed you are one of the relative few peeps that use a sig line. In many forums sig lines are considered gratuitous spam. #17 Keep up the good work by repeating what I have already posted...ie: it is the FF business model that is causing some of the resentment from the authors that think they deserve more credit and praise and the Adobe Exchange stuff. Thanks again Dad! It's a shame you weren't here when lots of discussion took place by those who were directly affected by the matter. Unfortunately I have followed many of those threads for the last few years and I've had to endure the whining, crying, bitching and moaning by several of the filter authors seeking more credit at almost every turn. I have also had to endure the name calling and denigrating posts that several users have made towards those no good dirty rotten "push button" renderers. I have also endured that painful thread that spaceray linked wh ere a FF user was eviscerated to the point of which a filter author had the user's image renders removed from an online library. Simply appalling! A good thing you may want to remember is to refrain from make assumptions on what a fellow forum user has or has not read. I have been a paying FF user for a couple of years now and a FF forum reader since before I purchased. You are making assumptions that are unfounded and completely wrong...you may want to avoid doing that in the future. #18 Worry about your own credibility...in-fact you have lost some of that credibility with me when you chose to call out my post and not some of the others. A friendly suggestion is not calling you out. Methinks you doth protest too much. Methinks you pulled that reply from a hat! Protest too much? That's so funny it's almost a joke. I have only posted on one thread and I have not protested anything! If you want to talk protesters...take a look through spaceray's 8000+ posts. Good grief! #19 Take a chill pill...nobody eat your lunch or stole your birthday. I will if you will. smile8) I'm already chilled...you don't want see me heat up... #20 Sometimes friendly advice is hard to give in a forum setting...especially in the way you are trying to go about it. You have never spoken to me, you don't know me, you have never replied to any of my previous posts, and you did not respond when I was "attacked" or people responded to me with inappropriate comments. You may want to consider use emoticons, private messages, or email when giving friendly advice to people you don't know and have not communicated with previously. Have a nice day. This is true but one can only try or not try. Nuff said. You have tried and tried again, I'll give you that.

Wow...you have successfully completed a line by line reply! I'm fully impressed now!

Take care.

Quote
You dirty dog

Please keep the discussion civil. In particular please refrain from personal remarks.

Quote
Please keep the discussion civil. In particular please refrain fr om personal remarks.

Quote
I took no offense at the "dirty dog" term. It's commonly used in American slang. It was nothing more than a kidding, poke in the ribs remark based on my company's former affiliate relationship with Filter Forge.

@ Fred & GMM

Thanks for that, Fred. Yes, that's exactly what it was.

@ Fred

As far as "edits" go about the only thing added to the post "late" was the info about post #4 which I forgot to mention in my second attempt at the post. My initial reply to you was eaten by the forum when I was evidently logged out before I posted ---> so I had to quickly rewrite the entire post. Usually I save a copy of all my posts before posting, but that time I had not. Groan! That first post that was eaten was almost perfect and I was making sure it was no edits required just for you. Since posts can remain "forever" I do prefer a clean typo free post.

I think most of the edit issue is some sort of glitch with the way my browser is caching the forum pages. For some reason after I have corrected a typo my browser must be showing, at times, the old page because the typo will still be there after the correction. For whatever reason a few of my words would end up with blank space in the middle or them, and after I had corrected the error the space would remain. I ended up leaving one of the "blank spaces" because no matter how many edits I did I could not get that typo corrected...so I gave up! I dunno...my browser is set to pull the latest page but I guess on this forum it is/was not always doing so...I have seen this issue occasionally on forums before.

As far as agreeing on most of the issues here...it's pretty clear that we do.

Quote
As to forums, moderation approaches etc., there are probably as many theories and notions as there are forums. As it happens, I've owned and operated the highest traffic forum on the internet for my industry for 11 years now. It is successful, enjoys the participation of numerous major advertisers and provides most of my living. FWIW, the examples you cited are 180° the opposite of mine.

@ Fred

Back in the early years of GWB I owned and operated a couple of forums...one was politics and and current events, the other was a photo art community. Unfortunately the forums got so busy that I could not dedicate enough time and energy to them so I closed them both. I still own both domains but the forums are now closed.

The forum I spend most of my time in now (which will remain unnamed) has over a half-million different threads and 15,000-25,000 users and guests visiting the forum at any given time. It's a self moderated forum where the users can smack a complaint button and/or issue infractions to the user's profile page...but it also has a staff of about 10 admins and mods that will slap the ban hammer down hard when someone deserves it.

The forum I have posted most in since 2002 is this one:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums

As you can see this forum has more than 1.2 million different threads with probably 20,000,000 posts...and this number is a lot lower than what it could be since a large number of threads were lost many years ago, and I believe they might be pruning some of the older topics as well.

Overly large forums like this are filled with so many sharks that it can foster a kill or be killed environment, and to be honest the forum is filled with tons of brand and technique fanboys.

The first primarily photo art and digital manipulation forum I joined back in 2002 is here:

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/

As you can see it has about 25,000 threads and over 200,000 posts. Some of members of this forum are among the best Photoshop people on the planet, bar none. That forum operates closer to the way this forum does...a tight community atmosphere.

If you wonder why I have shown the forums that I have participated in since 2002 --> it's the year I decided to do photos and photo art professionally. I first participated in usergroups/forums way back in 1996. Yeah, I know....I'm no spring chicken!

Take care.