While, as a photographer, I can appreciate the effort, the implementation of the method is laughable.
Let me explain- when I go places with family, I usually take photos of everyone. Just the way it is, and I very much enjoy doing it. On a recent trip, I took a series of photos of the children there and shared with the family members involved. One of those family members took a copy of the image to their local Walgreens, and wanted it printed. Walgreens said, (paraphrasing here) "This is a professional photo and we cannot let you have it until we see you have permission to have it printed."
Huh.
The photographer in me thinks this is a good thing. Stops idiots from just stealing images, getting them printed, and re-selling without permission.
However the computer geek in me laughs, almost cries at this. They accepted an email from my account saying I took the photo and the family member had permission to have it printed. Seriously- that was it. There is no method, nor will there ever be for Walgreens, to understand true authentication of the image release for use. There is no nationally secure photographers release location for printing. If all it takes is an email, how hard is it for anyone to sign up for a fake photographer email address and send yourself emails saying you have permission to print the image?
Walgreens- all you are doing is stopping the idiots who don't understand you can have more than one email account from getting prints. Whats worse, if a grandparent comes in with an image for their grandkids given to them from a family member... and it is professionally done, they don't have the 'release' to get it printed. It is simply preventing someone from getting that image printed of their grandkids.
No comments:
Post a Comment