Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Dec 18, 2012, 04:23 PM   #1
Razeus
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Instagram's 3rd Strike

I'm going to give more thought to the use of this service. I really like it too. But this is the 3rd strike against this service if they go through with it.

Don't know how this would affect my account, but it I have to wonder if "the internet" is blowing this out of portion in the usual manner. If they are truly going to let 3rd parties use my photos to create ads without my consent or notify when they use my photo in an ad, this is a deal breaker.

Strike 1 - being bought out my Facebook. It always happens "we'll keep the service the same", but it was just a matter of time.

Strike 2 - breaking Twitter card features. Just as Apple and Google should play nice, so should Twitter/Instagram for the sake of the user experience. This was just plain childish.

Strike 3 - change in the ToS. If they go through with it, I'm out as for as a "portfolio" in which I was using it for. I probably just keep a BS one and just post photos of food & dog.
__________________
Pictures & Tweets
Razeus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 04:25 PM   #2
pknz
macrumors 68020
 
pknz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NZ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razeus View Post
Strike 1 - being bought out my Facebook. It always happens "we'll keep the service the same", but it was just a matter of time.
This was strike 3 for me.
pknz is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 05:51 PM   #3
kevinfulton.ca
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razeus View Post
I'm going to give more thought to the use of this service. I really like it too. But this is the 3rd strike against this service if they go through with it.

Don't know how this would affect my account, but it I have to wonder if "the internet" is blowing this out of portion in the usual manner. If they are truly going to let 3rd parties use my photos to create ads without my consent or notify when they use my photo in an ad, this is a deal breaker.

Strike 1 - being bought out my Facebook. It always happens "we'll keep the service the same", but it was just a matter of time.

Strike 2 - breaking Twitter card features. Just as Apple and Google should play nice, so should Twitter/Instagram for the sake of the user experience. This was just plain childish.

Strike 3 - change in the ToS. If they go through with it, I'm out as for as a "portfolio" in which I was using it for. I probably just keep a BS one and just post photos of food & dog.
I was out the moment the Facebook deal was announced. Tried Flickr, but now I'm on 500px. A much better portfolio presentation. I'm curious as to how Instagram worked for you. Using it as a portfolio that is. How you used it, client procurement, etc. Thanks in advance!
__________________
13" White Macbook, 4 GB RAM, 500GB HD, 22" external monitor, 320 GB Firewire scratch disc, 2 TB partitioned expansion/backup HD; iPad 2, 64 GB, 3G; iPhone 4S, 16 GB.
kevinfulton.ca is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 06:19 PM   #4
steveash
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
I always thought of Instagram as a turd polisher and never really used it. All the same I deleted my account and app in protest of Facebook's 'let's see what we can get away with' approach to T&Cs.

It also got me thinking that people who post images to which they don't own the copyright are likely to be in serious legal problems if the image were to be sold.
steveash is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 18, 2012, 09:34 PM   #5
paolo-
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
I personally wouldn't put my images on instagram but it seems like they changed the policy (and also that it reflects what they wanted to do all along). http://blog.instagram.com/post/38252...were-listening They won't be using the images themselves for ads but rather data from them. The Verge also has a nice write up: http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3...ey-really-mean

Either way, I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of people who are serious about the ownership of their pictures outta there. I would actually like to see flickr come back in popularity. It just needs a bit of tidying up. If flickr gets traction back with the more serious photogs, I wouldn't be surprised to see Facebook tie up Instagram closer to Facebook (and then ask themselves why the balls they paid 1B$ for photo filters).
paolo- is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 01:01 AM   #6
Prodo123
macrumors 68020
 
Prodo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Instagram and the very concept of Instagram is analogous to putting lipstick on a pig.
Never used it, always hated the photos it made, much prefer a DSLR or even the default iPhone camera over it.
__________________
MacBook Pro 15" 2.2Ghz hi-res glossy, 16GB RAM, Logitech G700, Das Keyboard, Seagate Momentus XT 750GB iPhone 5 White 32GB Audiophile Photographer, videographer, audio engineer
Prodo123 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 08:42 AM   #7
fcortese
macrumors 68000
 
fcortese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Big Sky country
Quote:
Originally Posted by paolo- View Post
I personally wouldn't put my images on instagram but it seems like they changed the policy (and also that it reflects what they wanted to do all along). http://blog.instagram.com/post/38252...were-listening They won't be using the images themselves for ads but rather data from them. The Verge also has a nice write up: http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3...ey-really-mean

Either way, I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of people who are serious about the ownership of their pictures outta there. I would actually like to see flickr come back in popularity. It just needs a bit of tidying up. If flickr gets traction back with the more serious photogs, I wouldn't be surprised to see Facebook tie up Instagram closer to Facebook (and then ask themselves why the balls they paid 1B$ for photo filters).
It appears kind of disingenuous that Instagram/Facebook back peddled on this after the huge uproar in the media about this issue claiming that it was all a misunderstanding and that the instructions were a "little confusing" and that they were sorry about it. Well, when you're talking about HUGE bucks involved in this arrangement, I'm sure they didn't go to legal zoom.com to write up the ToS. They and their lawyers knew exactly what they were doing and IMO purposely made it vague. Makes one want to be cautious in dealing with someone who wants to do business like that.
__________________
15"MBP 2.66 i7 8GB; iPod Classic; iPhone5; Canon 5DIII w/24-105 f4L & 4 lenses
"You can observe a lot by just watching"-Yogi Berra
www.fotosbyflorian.com
fcortese is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 09:06 AM   #8
Razeus
Thread Starter
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinfulton.ca View Post
I was out the moment the Facebook deal was announced. Tried Flickr, but now I'm on 500px. A much better portfolio presentation. I'm curious as to how Instagram worked for you. Using it as a portfolio that is. How you used it, client procurement, etc. Thanks in advance!
I used it for my street photography (now deleted). I was going to use it as a place for high school seniors to look at "senior" photos for the upcoming season (I'm starting a side business for the first time), because I thought it's a cool place where kids hang out online. But I don't want my photos in ads without permission.

Even Instagram's response doesn't clear things up - it's obvious they want the photos to be used in ads. If it's just my profile pic, that's one thing. But actual photos, that they make money off of and I don't, is another.
__________________
Pictures & Tweets
Razeus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 10:09 AM   #9
PeterQVenkman
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
The back pedaling seems disingenuous. Just because the way they acted I'll delete my account. The heck with it. I barely used it anyway.
PeterQVenkman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 10:15 AM   #10
Razeus
Thread Starter
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Given FB's history, photos and privacy, I'm surprised Instagram tried to do this. It's not like they didn't have lawyers that wouldn't have warned them of the backlash.
__________________
Pictures & Tweets
Razeus is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 10:30 AM   #11
MacCruiskeen
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razeus View Post
Given FB's history, photos and privacy, I'm surprised Instagram tried to do this. It's not like they didn't have lawyers that wouldn't have warned them of the backlash.
It's not the lawyers' job to worry about that. Why should they care? FB paid $1 billion for Instagram, and now they need to turn it into a revenue stream somehow. This would seem to be an obvious move on their part. As it is, I don't post my photos to FB.
MacCruiskeen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 10:31 AM   #12
Artful Dodger
macrumors 68020
 
Artful Dodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: In a false sense of reality...My Mind!
This is interesting not because it was brought up but because some time ago, let's say 4-5 years ago or sooner I looked over what people were building up with one of the big three (3) storage photo sites. I noticed that in the fine print they had a very similar thing posted and yet everyone was more than ok with the terms. I never did get into one of them because of this and at any time they could change terms at the drop of a hat leaving people to scramble.

There is always something in the fine print sooner or later where free or nearly free becomes non-existant and people loose what has helped to build up said offerings…I think Apple set this standard as did a few other companies back about ten (10) years ago, maybe more.
__________________
27" iMac, 3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7, 16GB RAM, 1TB HDD + 256GB SSD, AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB; Quad G-Drive; 12" Wacom Cintiq
Artful Dodger is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 11:50 AM   #13
snberk103
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Island in the Salish Sea
I'm not sure why people are so surprised. If you aren't paying for the service, then you are not the customer - you are product.

I've never used Instagram, or Flickr for that matter. I am a professional photographer. My images have value, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a free service tried to profit from the value of the images.

----

Keep in mind that Instagram can't use images of recognizable people commercially. The person depicted still has to giver their consent to have their likeness used commercially. In a case like this Instagram would be negligent if they simply relied on the photographer's word that the model has consented to have their likeness commercially used. imho only, of course.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - Jack Layton
snberk103 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19, 2012, 12:46 PM   #14
nburwell
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: PHL
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveash View Post
It also got me thinking that people who post images to which they don't own the copyright are likely to be in serious legal problems if the image were to be sold.
This could be a cause for a huge headache. I don't religiously use Instagram, but I have an account and the app on my phone. I can't tell you how many times I have seen people posting images of stuff that aren't their own.

The app is too hipster for me. Nowadays I simply just browse my newsfeed. But there is only so many baby and dog pictures you can take.
__________________
13.3" rMBP 2.5GHz l iPhone 5s l iPad rMini l 4G iPod Touch l Apple TV l Nikon
nburwell is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2012, 12:10 PM   #15
Macshroomer
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103 View Post
I'm not sure why people are so surprised. If you aren't paying for the service, then you are not the customer - you are product.

I've never used Instagram, or Flickr for that matter. I am a professional photographer. My images have value, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a free service tried to profit from the value of the images.

----

Keep in mind that Instagram can't use images of recognizable people commercially. The person depicted still has to giver their consent to have their likeness used commercially. In a case like this Instagram would be negligent if they simply relied on the photographer's word that the model has consented to have their likeness commercially used. imho only, of course.
I'm a pro too and I also never used it, not my target market since I work with high end galleries. But several of my friends who are pretty famous for their journalism work used it.

What is surprising is just how badly they effed up here. All they had to do is make an option to either accept the new TOS under the free guise or charge an annual fee for "premium" users who wanted to keep full control of their work. I think they would have lost far fewer people, avoided a lot of this mess and made some money to boot...

But instead, they did not seize the real opportunity they had in hand because they are part of a much bigger problem of the digital age and the web age destroying nearly everything in it's path with sheer hubris. Instead, they pulled a bait and switch and will now pay dearly for it.

I think no matter how much they backpedal, at this point, they have lost many users permanently on principal alone...

Last edited by Macshroomer; Dec 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM.
Macshroomer is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2012, 02:58 PM   #16
100Teraflops
macrumors 6502a
 
100Teraflops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103 View Post
I'm not sure why people are so surprised. If you aren't paying for the service, then you are not the customer - you are product.

I've never used Instagram, or Flickr for that matter. I am a professional photographer. My images have value, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a free service tried to profit from the value of the images.

----

Keep in mind that Instagram can't use images of recognizable people commercially. The person depicted still has to giver their consent to have their likeness used commercially. In a case like this Instagram would be negligent if they simply relied on the photographer's word that the model has consented to have their likeness commercially used. imho only, of course.
Well said! I upload pix to FB for my family, but I am hesitant to incorporate it into my small business. Plus I am not very popular on FB anyways.
__________________
Long live the photographer! Got memories? Record your moments with current electronic devices. I stumble, fall, get up and do it again.
100Teraflops is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2012, 06:47 PM   #17
DirtySocks85
macrumors 65816
 
DirtySocks85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Wichita, KS
Quote:
Originally Posted by snberk103 View Post
I'm not sure why people are so surprised. If you aren't paying for the service, then you are not the customer - you are product.

I've never used Instagram, or Flickr for that matter. I am a professional photographer. My images have value, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a free service tried to profit from the value of the images.
Generally speaking, I get your point, and I agree, but Flickr's business model is to give you a limited free service in hopes that you will sign up for their paid extras. So if you're using the free service you aren't a customer, but rather you're a potential customer.
__________________
13"MacBook Pro (mid 2010) iPhone 5 32GB Black/Slate iPod Classic 80GB
• Canon EOS Rebel T3i • Nexus 7
JStiles Photography Website JStiles Photography on Facebook
DirtySocks85 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2012, 07:36 PM   #18
snberk103
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Island in the Salish Sea
Quote:
Originally Posted by DirtySocks85 View Post
Generally speaking, I get your point, and I agree, but Flickr's business model is to give you a limited free service in hopes that you will sign up for their paid extras. So if you're using the free service you aren't a customer, but rather you're a potential customer.
Yes, but we are talking about Instagram. And, tbh, I have no idea if Instagram has the model. But it would explain why Flickr is not facing this backlash, and Instagram is.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - Jack Layton
snberk103 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2013, 01:03 AM   #19
rjmCreative
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
I like using Instagram so I can share images with friends and relatives. For any type of professional work I am showing off I just make sure I link my portfolio site on social networks. I also use Flickr as an online gallery.
__________________
2013 Macbook Air 13" | i7 | 3.3Ghz | 128GB Flash | 8GB RAM
2013 iMac 27" | i7 | 3.4Ghz | 1TB Fusion | 8GB RAM | 680MX
iPhone 5
rjmCreative is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Special Interests > Visual Media > Digital Photography

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Instagram Updated With 'Instagram Direct' Private Photo and Video Sharing MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 12 Dec 12, 2013 07:36 PM
Instagram down? KoolAid-Drink iOS 7 3 Nov 10, 2013 11:58 PM
You can share videos of VintiqueCam to Instagram with the new version of Instagram! seonggukchae iPhone and iPod touch Apps 0 Aug 7, 2013 09:14 PM
Getting Instagram @Mention notifications outside Instagram? CameraTester iPhone and iPod touch Apps 2 Dec 17, 2012 07:29 PM
iPad 3rd and 4th Generation wifi speeds - 3rd is faster? cynewulf23 iPad Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 0 Dec 4, 2012 02:49 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC