Art and Photography

Instagram removed my foto - no explanation, nothing!

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 9th, 2017 7:55 pm
Tags:
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 15, 2012
9673 posts
3992 upvotes
Southern Ontario
GoodFellaz wrote:
Oct 7th, 2017 10:45 am
If u want to showcase your photos, Just open a web site and put your photos there, since you OWN the web site, you decide the terms and conditions ,and you know your photos will never be removed. or Stick with the Graham and be bound to their terms and conditions which is subject to them deleting your photo even if it does not breach copyright act
You simply won't get the same traffic/exposure/followers etc to your own site. Hashtags also drive people to your images.
Best to do both if there is commercial incentive. If not, why pay and invest your time into hosting your content?

We get it's not always nice to play by their rules but they built the roads. It doesn't matter how beautiful your store is whether your selling or just showing people your gallery, getting people to it is key.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 17, 2012
1806 posts
211 upvotes
In another world
I don't get it.
The builgind is in a public place, so chances are hundreds of people take the same building photo from the same angle, using different cameras, perhaps the same cameras but at different hours.
Besides, IMO one can claim copyright infrigement if the person is selling the photo... making a profit out of it, which I don't think it was your case.

An example: what if I go to The Oscars and stand right behind a professional photographer, take a picture of a celebrity he or she's shooting. Then the photog sells the pic, and I upload my image in Instagram, Would I be liable to pay royalties to that photog?
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2012
9883 posts
877 upvotes
Pacific Ocean
AncasterRFD wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 12:15 pm
You simply won't get the same traffic/exposure/followers etc to your own site. Hashtags also drive people to your images.
Best to do both if there is commercial incentive. If not, why pay and invest your time into hosting your content?

We get it's not always nice to play by their rules but they built the roads. It doesn't matter how beautiful your store is whether your selling or just showing people your gallery, getting people to it is key.
Instagram has a line to put your website regardless which increases exposure further.
If the glove don't fit you must acquit! #WINNING
Sr. Member
User avatar
Jun 24, 2015
590 posts
56 upvotes
Woodbridge, ON
AncasterRFD wrote:
Oct 8th, 2017 12:15 pm
You simply won't get the same traffic/exposure/followers etc to your own site. Hashtags also drive people to your images.
Best to do both if there is commercial incentive. If not, why pay and invest your time into hosting your content?

We get it's not always nice to play by their rules but they built the roads. It doesn't matter how beautiful your store is whether your selling or just showing people your gallery, getting people to it is key.
What good is the exposure if your not an artist? most people just snap photos of them eating, or dancing or doing silly things, what good is exposure if your not an actual artist? and there is no financial gain? its to what? it seems people just want to be a popular socialite now a days, so if u want to be popular on someone else's site, you need to play by their rules unfortunately.
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2012
9883 posts
877 upvotes
Pacific Ocean
gontori wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 2:31 pm


An example: what if I go to The Oscars and stand right behind a professional photographer, take a picture of a celebrity he or she's shooting. Then the photog sells the pic, and I upload my image in Instagram, Would I be liable to pay royalties to that photog?
Nope, because it has to be the same exact foto. They have to prove the foto is identical and registered under dmca or other copyright. That's like saying all the pro-fotogs would be suing each other all day long since the same 100 have the same press credentials at all these celeb events shooting the same celebs.
If the glove don't fit you must acquit! #WINNING
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 17, 2012
1806 posts
211 upvotes
In another world
aznnorth wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 2:57 pm
Nope, because it has to be the same exact foto. They have to prove the foto is identical and registered under dmca or other copyright. That's like saying all the pro-fotogs would be suing each other all day long since the same 100 have the same press credentials at all these celeb events shooting the same celebs.
Exactly!
Then Instagram and the Reddit guy don't have arguments for copyright infringement.
And I think Demi's case is in the same situation.
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2012
9883 posts
877 upvotes
Pacific Ocean
gontori wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 3:20 pm
Exactly!
Then Instagram and the Reddit guy don't have arguments for copyright infringement.
And I think Demi's case is in the same situation.
Reddit guy's is obviously licensing his foto to several local news org's. I think he took it down becuz he wants to monopolize his pic as the only one that gets passed around to legit paying media/new sources. My foto is still up after re-posting. ;)
If the glove don't fit you must acquit! #WINNING
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 15, 2012
9673 posts
3992 upvotes
Southern Ontario
aznnorth wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 2:50 pm

Instagram has a line to put your website regardless which increases exposure further.
GoodFellaz wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 2:57 pm
What good is the exposure if your not an artist? most people just snap photos of them eating, or dancing or doing silly things, what good is exposure if your not an actual artist? and there is no financial gain? its to what? it seems people just want to be a popular socialite now a days, so if u want to be popular on someone else's site, you need to play by their rules unfortunately.
I don't understand what you're trying to say. There are over 800 million users plus you can put a link to your website on your Instagram page as aznnorth says. Many of these people are doing what you're exactly describing, sharing and communicating their lives. Why wouldn't you want to be in the same network that you can even further define as those with your common interests?

It doesn't need to be black and white. If you only had a site, you would only get a fraction of viewers, standing alone.

If you don't care if people see your work, whether you make money off it or not, just cloud it, keep it backed up on a few drives, or print and hoard like Vivian Maier.

It's the difference between Web 1.0 (a singular website) vs 2.0 (social media), interaction and the volume of traffic.

"If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?"

Top