Social Networking & Sharing...

The Neglected Photo Path

The classic traditions of amateur photography, the family photo albums, shown down the generations. The craft of albums and storage of images from camera to developers to home, all these traditional methods have been revolutionized over the history of photography and at a high rate over the last 20 years. With the introduction of digital photography images are more easily accessible, easily stored in an electronic environment, storing thousands of photos with out the need for a great quantity of space to hold albums etc. Social networking sites holding vast amounts of images, some very personal and do break the conventional rules of sharing, however these sites hold thousands of images that only ever exist in the realms that are the social networking sites, sites storing and sharing sites such as Flickr images are never printed  they remain as digital code so do they become photographs? If they are never physical, does an image have to be physical to be a photograph or a piece of photography? the issue and era of these new photo paths does raise quite a lot of questions the traditionalists will raise an eyebrow at. However photography since day one has always been about progression from one era to the next, photographers have always looked to further the medium. So these new paths of photo sharing can be for the better where photography is concerned. However I feel the notion of sharing images has changed dramatically and for the better where they can be printed and shot much easier allowing everyone with even the most little of knowledge to indulge them selves in photography. But with this new sense of sharing and shooting images, the use of images has changed greatly, the reason why we shoot images has be altered vastly this coming along with the introduction of social networking, creating virtual presences and representations of yourself, taking images to show yourself naturally and for who you are would be seen as the route to go down, but with this form of social gathering and communication, there is the possibility to alter  appearance, show less or more depending on what your happy with, but the case is people forget what is appropriate and who can see these virtual images used to represent your self, as some people wouldn't stick a photo of them on a billboard for everyone to see, but online its the same principal if not more people can possibly see your image. These images being personal as in they are about your self and who you wish to portray, but also on other websites, amateur and professionals work is displayed on the same websites which has never happened before well not as regularly as it is now done on the web. This creates issues such as its harder to get credit, to get noticed etc with imagery being all over the web so easily accessible, also issues with copyright  images easily taken and used without the owners consent etc does prove to be a big problem with the internet holding so many images where does the line cross before you are invading someones privacy on the social network front, all when does accessing an image or using an become an invasion of copyright...

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/1935920/facebook-users-unknowingly-breaking-copyright-laws

The british journal of photography covering a growing issue that concerns the vast social network that is Facebook, and the issue that is the use of images, because more and more people are using professional images as profile pictures with the rapid movement in image quality peoples 8mp cameras are not cutting it enough so people look to professional images etc but not always with the consent of the photographers they have used to get these said images. As with booking a shoot you have the shoot you get the selection of images but the consent is sometimes lost in translation a need for image license information is needed so that this issue of copyright infringement is not as common.

"People aren't knowingly breaking the law, they just need to be made aware," says Hewlett. "Copyright belongs to the photographer. This is unless the photographer has been contracted to take the images with the client owning the copyright. According to British law, copyright is granted at the point of creation. It belongs to the photographer unless it is taken by an employee in the course of their work, here it belongs automatically to employer."- BJP Facebook users "unknowingly" breaking copyright law- Oliver laurent, 10/01/2011

As with this new age of digital imagery sharing, mixed with the necessity of the social network the boundaries between copyright and what is deemed necessary are being crossed day in day out, making photographers jobs harder to keep up with whats being used and not used, within this new age photography may becoming easier for the masses but with that more difficult for professionals in ways.

This not just being and issue for the consumers dis-using professional photography, there are many cases of professional agencies with access to professional miss using images on the web, mis sharing them for own financial gain, there have been many accusations of companies infringing on sharing copyright,
http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2101339/photo-agency-wins-landmark-copyright-victory, 

Businesses begin to receive bills for miss use of imagery copyright infringements http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2075750/businesses-warned-infringing-photographers-copyright,  when the issue of this new age has become so clouded an difficult to get it right, issue of mis use and mis haps are becoming too common, from small businesses to the Daily Mail have been accused of lifting Flickr images> http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2043264/daily-mail-accused-lifting-flickr-image, however this issue of sharing- social networking, use of images online are all intwined together with the miss use of images, infringement of copyright becoming more and more of an issue as photography goes more digital and more viral in many ways, with the introduction of smart phones, tablets, wifi hotspots etc, images and the changing of images can be done more and more easily making it too easy for copyright infringement, possibly there is not enough info about what you can and cant do with an image of the web, do you know?

However the online storage of images, easily accessed by the public does ask the question why post it online if you don't want anyone to take the images and miss use them why post them somewhere they can be miss used. However that does not give the right for anyone to miss use an image, there are many levels to this argument but I feel the photo path has we know it has far from been neglected it has completely been altered and changed to suit the times, as photography progresses there are always going to be pros and cons, but there is progression and thats the main thing, however the progression may take another turn in the near future but the storage and sharing of images wether on social networking sites or image related sites there is going to be more and more of a collision of views on whats right and whats wrong with viewing and sharing but a new photographic path has evolved and looks to grow and get stronger as time goes on...