Protecting Images

Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2005 10:26 pm (19 years, 2 months ago)

domuk wrote:

If you placed the jpg into a flash swf and locked it, would this not protect the swf file and thus the jpg?

Assuming the 'protection' that Flash can add to swf files is perfect (it probably is not), the user could still take a screenshot of the image to make a copy.

WebHelper Joined: 15 Jan 2004 Posts: 91

1) low res jpg (on site)
2) inside a flash document
3) fading in and out of focus (overlapping multiple fades)(however this is anoyning)
4) watermarked (manually in a difficult to remove location)

That should be enough to stop most people, however the more you do to protect your shots the less accessible they are.

If someone is really determined (eg to crack flash's protection) and they want to steel your jpg they will, but for them to do that your pictures must be worth loads of money. maybe like u2 new album being distributed over the net…..

The main line of defence is low res shots on line and perhaps give a sample picture of your mug shot to demonstrate the true quality of your work.

If they wanted to steel that then there is NO HOPE...... Wink

Q1) do you loose any quality (resolution / colour / focus etc) taking a screen shot of a jpg from a website compared with the original jpg?

Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:21 pm (19 years, 2 months ago)

domuk wrote:

Q1) do you loose any quality (resolution / colour / focus etc) taking a screen shot of a jpg from a website compared with the original jpg?

Possibly. The screen shot would be saved at the resolution of the screen, which might be less than that of the image.