Right Click Disable?

[taygull]

I'm curious how to disable the right click option on a web page, specifically adding the code to a simpleviewer page?

Thanks in advance!

[SoaringUSAEagle]

I dont know why you would want to do that... All browsers have the option to View >> Page Source.

[taygull]

I dont know why you would want to do that... All browsers have the option to View >> Page Source.

If you disable the right click it makes it very difficult for the "average joe" to steal images. Unless I'm wrong viewing the source does not give you the access to save an image.

[coreypolis]

its in the data.xml file, something like right click = true/false

[tommykjensen]

If you disable the right click it makes it very difficult for the "average joe" to steal images. Unless I'm wrong viewing the source does not give you the access to save an image.

No but soemtimes you can see where the image is actually stored and thereby creating the url manually and get the image outside the html page with the script to disable right click.

If the image is displayed on screen it can be saved. For example with print screen.

In my opinion disabling right click is useless and just annoying for most users.

[coreypolis]

another option for html galleries:
make an image transparent, and make the background of the image the actual image. tht way if they try and right click save as, all they get is a solid image of black or whatever the normal background is.

nothing can be done to prevent screen capture, but a 2x3 at 72dpi image isn't exactly going to win any print awards, just might show up on other sites

[taygull]

No but soemtimes you can see where the image is actually stored and thereby creating the url manually and get the image outside the html page with the script to disable right click.

If the image is displayed on screen it can be saved. For example with print screen.

In my opinion disabling right click is useless and just annoying for most users.

....and I have no problem with making it annoying for most users, why do they need to save my images or why do they need my source code? I viewed my source code and did not see where you could grab the image. If they want to go to the trouble of the prints screen then no problem. I do know my sister was able to right click, save a couple of images and then she used them on some Christmas cards, I'm ok with that for her but it makes me wonder who else could do the same thing.

[tommykjensen]

....and I have no problem with making it annoying for most users, why do they need to save my images or why do they need my source code? I viewed my source code and did not see where you could grab the image. If they want to go to the trouble of the prints screen then no problem. I do know my sister was able to right click, save a couple of images and then she used them on some Christmas cards, I'm ok with that for her but it makes me wonder who else could do the same thing.

Of course that is your right to do. But if you think it is going to stop anybody from saving a copy of your photos you are kidding yourself. If someone really wants to save a copy they can do it. So why waste time adding mechanisms that at most add 5-10 seconds to the process of saving the photo?

[Liam:]

add this to the body of the page, should work, but of course if uve got a clever clogs there will read the pafe source and get the url and save it.

<script language=JavaScript>
<!--

//Disable right mouse click Script
//By Maximus (maximus@nsimail.com) w/ mods by DynamicDrive
//For full source code, visit http://www.dynamicdrive.com

var message="Function Disabled!";

///////////////////////////////////
function clickIE4(){
if (event.button==2){
alert(message);
return false;
}
}

function clickNS4(e){
if (document.layers||document.getElementById&&!document.all){
if (e.which==2||e.which==3){
alert(message);
return false;
}
}
}

if (document.layers){
document.captureEvents(Event.MOUSEDOWN);
document.onmousedown=clickNS4;
}
else if (document.all&&!document.getElementById){
document.onmousedown=clickIE4;
}

document.oncontextmenu=new Function("alert(message);return false")

// -->
</script>

liam.

[taygull]

Of course that is your right to do. But if you think it is going to stop anybody from saving a copy of your photos you are kidding yourself. If someone really wants to save a copy they can do it. So why waste time adding mechanisms that at most add 5-10 seconds to the process of saving the photo?

Explain to me how it adds 5-10 seconds (I think I've got an extra 5-10 seconds when I create a simpleviewer gallery) if it is in the html code on a web page? I'm not trying to stop the guy who "really wants it".

Based on your suggestion I guess I should not lock my doors at night or lock my car doors because if they really want my stuff they are going to take it anyway?:rolleyes:

[tommykjensen]

Explain to me how it adds 5-10 seconds (I think I've got an extra 5-10 seconds when I create a simpleviewer gallery) if it is in the html code on a web page? I'm not trying to stop the guy who "really wants it".


I just figured it would take 5 to 10 seconds to hit ALT PRINT SCREEN open a favorite photo editor and paste the clipboard and save.

[coreypolis]

13. I want to my users to be able to save my images. How can I do this?
Users can open images in a new window by right-clicking on the image, if you set the optional enableRightClickOpen value in gallery.xml. See all XML options here.

You can also add text links in the image captions to open up the jpg in a new window. This will allow users to right-click the image and save it. To add a HTML link in the comments, use something like the following:

<caption><![CDATA[<A href="images/DSC_0696.jpg" target="_blank">
<U>Open image in new window</U></A>]]></caption>
Alternatively, if you are using buildGallery.php, you can automatically generate
download links by editing the script and setting $showDownloadLinks = true


http://www.airtightinteractive.com/simpleviewer/faq.html

[taygull]

http://www.airtightinteractive.com/simpleviewer/faq.html

so is your answer to do the opposite of this? I'm wanting to disable not enable?

[coreypolis]

so is your answer to do the opposite of this? I'm wanting to disable not enable?
thats just from the faq, just do the opposite of what it says. they didn't have a faq for disable, but you have the idea, code, and now the page addres of where more info can be found. I figured you could tweek it to your needs from there

[tommykjensen]

so is your answer to do the opposite of this? I'm wanting to disable not enable?

You missed the point. The faq mentions an option to disable or enable right click.

http://www.airtightinteractive.com/simpleviewer/xml_options.html

[SoaringUSAEagle]

viewed my source code and did not see where you could grab the image.

Search for <img src="image.jpg"> Or if it's set as a table background it'd be <table width="width" height="height" background="image.jpg"> etc.

Then as previously stated, that could then be typed in the address bar and saved.

Why are you so paranoid about images being stolen anyhow? If you keep the resolution very low, the image will not be printed as anything great so I would not worry.

[taygull]

You missed the point. The faq mentions an option to disable or enable right click.

http://www.airtightinteractive.com/simpleviewer/xml_options.html

You are correct I did miss it! Thanks for the followup, I went in and changed all my galleries. They are reuploading now....so maybe I can at least keep the honest people away. LOL

[taygull]

Search for <img src="image.jpg"> Or if it's set as a table background it'd be <table width="width" height="height" background="image.jpg"> etc.

Then as previously stated, that could then be typed in the address bar and saved.

Why are you so paranoid about images being stolen anyhow? If you keep the resolution very low, the image will not be printed as anything great so I would not worry.

Honestly the biggest reason is I've recently done a few shoots were the record label wants to at least make it difficult for people to get the images. I want to at least do what is reasonable to protect them.

[SoaringUSAEagle]

Understandable. I guess just do what they ask then lol.

[kckong]

Then as previously stated, that could then be typed in the address bar and saved.

There is code that you can put onto your server that prevents such direct access to image files. However, i don't know if the smugmugs and photobuckets give you this feature.

For example, have a look at the galleries (eg Sam Abell's Photographic Life) at digitaljournalist.org - you can sniff out the URL of the image but you won't be able to access them directly. Or even hotlink them from pages outside of dj's site. This technique is effective as far as bandwidth theft is concerned but not image theft. IMHO, as long as browsers have caches, image theft cannot be stopped. :)

[harveyd]

disabling right click is one of the silliest things to do.

You are disabling what is often the primary means of next / back navigation, not to mention other functionality given with right click. with absolutely no gain, users can still view source, I dont even need to view source on ie 6, a little hover box comes up asking me if i want to save

http://arandomurl.com/screen.jpg

not to mention how this picture came around, a screenshot

Usually people with this attitude have little worth stealing anyway, but if its on the internet, it can be stolen, your only choice is to watermark it, or dont show it. If anyone is making any sort of money from your pictures, you will find out about it incredibly fast, piracy is hard to hide on the internet. so dont resort to silly tactics that will just fustrate genuine users

[taygull]

Usually people with this attitude have little worth stealing anyway,

I had respect for what you had to say until you threw in this line.:rolleyes:

[Radtech1]

....and I have no problem with making it annoying for most users, why do they need to save my images or why do they need my source code?

BUT the price you pay is to make is annoying for most users to navigate your website.

I use Rt Click then Back to get around. Easier, faster than mousing around for the little back arrow on the toolbar. If you want to protect your images, think of a better way than by disabling my right mouse button. Whenever I come across a website like that, I usually fire off an EMail to the website owner that basically says what I think about them making it harder for me to use their site, and then I never go back.

Most people just never go back without EMailing why.

If you want to make it hard for your customers, sounds like a bad business decision.

Rad

[taygull]

BUT the price you pay is to make is annoying for most users to navigate your website.

I use Rt Click then Back to get around. Easier, faster than mousing around for the little back arrow on the toolbar. If you want to protect your images, think of a better way than by disabling my right mouse button. Whenever I come across a website like that, I usually fire off an EMail to the website owner that basically says what I think about them making it harder for me to use their site, and then I never go back.

Most people just never go back without EMailing why.

If you want to make it hard for your customers, sounds like a bad business decision.

Rad

I would disagree that this option is making it difficult for "most users". I have not had one complaint, from anyone on my site being difficult to navigate. I would say it is the opposite. There is only one reason someone would select a picture and right click on it in my gallery and that would be to copy it and use it without permission. I'm not so paranoid that I think if someone really wants an image they can get it. I would suspect that 95% of the people who view a site have little knowledge on how to save an image if the right click save as option is available.


First, right clicking or hitting the back button will do nothing for you on my site when you are viewing the galleries as they open in a new window. I'm not disabling the right click button any place other than my simpleviewer gallery.

There is one thing I have learned in business, it is that you can not try and please every single person, so within reason I'm doing what is best for me with little to no impact on the type of person who will find value in my site.

[TeeJay]

I realise I'm joining this "discussion" quite late - however, I use Simpleviewer and the "right-click -> option" doesn't appear when viewing my galleries. Are you saying that it appears when browsing the Simpleviewer flash gallery?

I do however, disable the right-click in the HTML code that Porta generates (I use Porta to generate the thumbnails and images and Simpleviewer to create the gallery/navigation) and I switch off the pop-up "save to..." icon.

I also don't see why I should make it easy for anyone to "borrow" my images, nomater what their resolution.

TJ

[canonphotog]

....and I have no problem with making it annoying for most users, why do they need to save my images or why do they need my source code? I viewed my source code and did not see where you could grab the image. If they want to go to the trouble of the prints screen then no problem. I do know my sister was able to right click, save a couple of images and then she used them on some Christmas cards, I'm ok with that for her but it makes me wonder who else could do the same thing.

You should have a problem with making it annoying for most users. I right click to open links in new windows all the time. When I get to a site that blocks right-clicking, I leave. Don't care any further whether your site might have been worth visiting or not. At that point it's just garbage.

Ken

[taygull]

You should have a problem with making it annoying for most users. I right click to open links in new windows all the time. When I get to a site that blocks right-clicking, I leave. Don't care any further whether your site might have been worth visiting or not. At that point it's just garbage.

Ken

So my site is just garbage because when my simpleviewer gallery opens in a new window you can't right click on an image? That is probably the stupidest thing I've read on this forum. All of the other pages have the right click option, when a gallery opens it opens in a new window so you can't select the back button anyway. Convince me of the value of the right click on my simpleviewer gallery instead of making arbitrary dumb remarks and I'll put it back.

[samsen]

Its a mistake to think disabling right click is going to help you at all in letting some one steal your image.
Those who steal are not average Joe.

[taygull]

Its a mistake to think disabling right click is going to help you at all in letting some one steal your image.
Those who steal are not average Joe.

You are mistaken, there are many who don't have a clue to ask permission to use an image. I'm not trying to "STOP" image thieves, for images that I don't want floating around or being stolen they don't get posted. You won't see any of my "published" images on my site or anywhere else until after the publication is released. I just don't want to make it "easy".

I appreciate the stellar advice from all the experts on why or why not, on how you will cease to exist and sites are just garbage if you can't use your trusty right click as an option.

Thanks but I was not looking for a debate on how to build my site, I was simply looking for a tutorial or method to change a function of my site.

So if you guys want to debate this then that is fine, I've gotten what I needed out of this thread.

[canonphotog]

So my site is just garbage because when my simpleviewer gallery opens in a new window you can't right click on an image? That is probably the stupidest thing I've read on this forum. All of the other pages have the right click option, when a gallery opens it opens in a new window so you can't select the back button anyway. Convince me of the value of the right click on my simpleviewer gallery instead of making arbitrary dumb remarks and I'll put it back.

I'm not interested in convincing you. As a matter of fact I've already added your website to my hosts file so if I ever forget and try to launch it, it won't even load on my system, thus preventing the annoyance. I'm also not the guy that right clicks to go back. Heck, the backspace key does that just fine and if you're using a modern multi-button mouse, one of the side keys goes back, just as one goes forward(when possible)

I look at it this way. As much as possible, I utilize all keyboard shortcuts and all the web browser shortcuts on my system. Whenever I encounter a site that wants to dictate how I use my system, I just block that site and don't go there. Unless you're willing to pay me to look at your site, you don't have any right to try to control how I use my computer to do so.

As an aside, I hate sites that open up with flash and the stupid "enter here" link. Needless to say, I don't ever click on "enter here":evil:

So for me, you believing that what I have said is the stupidest thing you've read on this forum is quite flattering..., and totally irrelevent.

Don't take this wrong. I don't have anything against you personally per se, just websites that play foolish games.

Ken

[coreypolis]

I'm not interested in convincing you. As a matter of fact I've already added your website to my hosts file so if I ever forget and try to launch it, it won't even load on my system, thus preventing the annoyance.

I look at it this way. As much as possible I utilize all keyboard shortcuts and all the web browser shortcuts on my system. Whenever I encounter a site that wants to dictate how I use my system, I just block that site and don't go there. Unless you're willing to pay me to look at your site, you don't have any right to try to restrict how I use my computer to do so.

As an aside, I hate sites that open up with flash and the stupid "enter here" link. Needless to say, I don't ever click on "enter here":evil:

Ken
so you'll never use a flash site then :rolleyes:

go you

[coreypolis]

there is no need to be able to right click in a simple viewer gallery, and the default for many of the programs that create them is to have it off.

[taygull]

I'm not interested in convincing you. As a matter of fact I've already added your website to my hosts file so if I ever forget and try to launch it, it won't even load on my system, thus preventing the annoyance.

I look at it this way. As much as possible I utilize all keyboard shortcuts and all the web browser shortcuts on my system. Whenever I encounter a site that wants to dictate how I use my system, I just block that site and don't go there. Unless you're willing to pay me to look at your site, you don't have any right to try to restrict how I use my computer to do so.

As an aside, I hate sites that open up with flash and the stupid "enter here" link. Needless to say, I don't ever click on "enter here":evil:

Ken

Well I guess you are showing your ignorance, you can't read, and you might as well hide in a cage because there will be millions of sites that dictate how you will or how you will not be able to navigate them.

I'm serious I will change all the settings on my site if you can tell me one good reason to have the right click option on when you are viewing my simpleviewer gallery. Since you represent "most users" I really want to know how the right click helps. Now don't go into a rant about all the options because those options are still available on every page except when the simpleviewer gallery is launched into a new window....

It sounds to me like you are just being a grumpy old man...;) :lol:

[canonphotog]

so you'll never use a flash site then :rolleyes:

go you


No. I'm on a dial-up system. Waiting on flash is a PITA.

When I was where I could utilize a cable modem. Flash wasn't a problem, but "enter here" buttons still were.:lol:

[coreypolis]

No. I'm on a dial-up system. Waiting on flash is a PITA.

When I was where I could utilize a cable modem. Flash wasn't a problem, but "enter here" buttons still were.:lol:
good luck with that. most sites aren't built for dial up anymore. You're in the minority and should point that out when giving advice like that.

He needs to cater to his target market, which isn't going to be on a dial up network

[taygull]

good luck with that. most sites aren't built for dial up anymore. You're in the minority and should point that out when giving advice like that.

He needs to cater to his target market, which isn't going to be on a dial up network

I guess all my research is wrong........dial up users who want the speed and agility of right clicking in a flash gallery are "most users".:lol:

[canonphotog]

Well I guess you are showing your ignorance, you can't read, and you might as well hide in a cage because there will be millions of sites that dictate how you will or how you will not be able to navigate them.

I'm serious I will change all the settings on my site if you can tell me one good reason to have the right click option on when you are viewing my simpleviewer gallery. Since you represent "most users" I really want to know how the right click helps. Now don't go into a rant about all the options because those options are still available on every page except when the simpleviewer gallery is launched into a new window....

It sounds to me like you are just being a grumpy old man...;) :lol:

Oh..., I could easily be just a grumpy old man:lol: . I've read all the posts, perhaps read more into them than you'd like. IE6 and above block pop-ups automatically unless you turn that 'feature off'. Many people run pop-up blockers. Even I do. I find that mostly it catches javascript nowadays.

I actually like the software that this forum uses which incidentally launches a posted link in a new window. I also like that it doesn't stop me from launching it myself in a new window.

For me that's the only issue. If your html, xml code simply blocked the save picture portion of the right-click, that would be fine. Unfortunately, most sites don't do that. They just block it.

Why not treat the right click as a left click in this case. You're already using the left click to launch into a new window. Make the same thing happen on right-click if you can't find another way to defeat the save picture function. That would expediently open the new window. How could I complain about that.

When the pic is open in simple viewer(which I don't know anything about) can you default the right click to close the open window?

That would probably surprise someone not expecting it, but hey, at that point they have already seen your image.

Now then, I'd expect you don't shop in every store in town, so why would you think that I would care about the millions of trivial sites out there trying to control how I view them? :cool:

The key to "controlling your viewers" and keep them happy is to not let them know they are being controlled.

Ken

[canonphotog]

I guess all my research is wrong........dial up users who want the speed and agility of right clicking in a flash gallery are "most users".:lol:

I actually had to search the thread to see why you keep beating me with this "most users" comment. Then Corey stabs me with "target market":lol: Hadn't even crossed my mind.

While high speed internet is readily available in most major cities, much of Texas is still rural. Were it that dsl was available where I am, I'd have it. I actually expected to at least be able to get dsl where I am. Fancy that.

I recognize that most sites written today are no longer optimized for dial-up. I wouldn't expect them to be. However, even flash driven Canon sites offer the choice between html and flash. Until Corey mentioned your "target market" I was under the impression that you just wanted to cripple right clicking on your site. And yes, I noted later that you said it's only on the one page. That makes it more frustrating in my book as it is an inconsistent behavior on the website.




Ken

[harveyd]

pop up windows and disable right click scripts, does your site have a clock following the mouse trail?

The reason these practices are almost defunct now is that they are incredibly annoying, that isnt a "my users havent complained so it must be fine" measure, its a well researched topic, not that i like quoting neilsen, but popups made number 8 on the top 10 web design mistakes

"Opening up new browser windows is like a vacuum cleaner sales person who starts a visit by emptying an ash tray on the customer's carpet."

there are various other articles relating to why not to disable right click as well

http://www.sitepoint.com/article/dont-disable-right-click
http://websiteowner.info/articles/ethics/norightclick.asp
http://blogs.msdn.com/jeffdav/archive/2004/05/06/127443.aspx

Not disabling the standard items in a context menu is enough of a reason not to disable right click, you dont want people bookmarking your site? Not even mentioning the number of people using 3rd extentions, including very importantly mouse gestures, which rely on the right mouse button.

[And0]

Consider upgrading your webpage to flash

[tommykjensen]

Consider upgrading your webpage to flash

That still won't make it harder to steal the photos. And it will also mean users will stay away. I know that many do not like flash based sites. Myself included.

[Radtech1]

I have not had one complaint, from anyone on my site being difficult to navigate.

Which is EXACTLY as I foretold, reread my post and notice where I said:

Most people just never go back without EMailing why.

In the final analysis, it's your decision. It's a stupid one, but yours nonetheless.

Rad

[taygull]

Which is EXACTLY as I foretold, reread my post and notice where I said:



In the final analysis, it's your decision. It's a stupid one, but yours nonetheless.

Rad

Tell me why disabling a right click in a gallery that the only feature it stops is the ability to save an image? You can't "go back", I think it is rare someone will bookmark the individual gallery.

Have you even gone to my site and seen the impact of disabling this feature, or just because you are on the other side of the fence you think it is a stupid one. The right click has no impact on the ability to navigate when on that page.

[aLFaDaRK]

I haven't read through the 3 pages of this topic, but I'd like to put my opinion on this as I'm a successful website designer, and know what things I like and dislike about websites.

And disabling right click is something I absolutely hate. There's no use for it, if somebody wants your image, they'll get it somehow.

Sometimes, if I really love a photo and want to save it to my computer (not for prints, not for redistribution, just simply for enjoyment or inspiration) I have to try and get around the stupid right click disabling scripts by going into the source code (not at all a hard task for someone who writes HTML every single day, but still not conveniant). And there's the printscreen method for those who are less computer-savy, or for flash websites.

There's something else I don't like. Flash is used by designers as a gimmick to make people visit their websites...but in all honesty it's just annoying and is generally accompanied with an annoying background music choice.

Anyway, my point is, if I were to put my photos in an online gallery (which I will at some point when all my clients' work is done), I would leave the images with no right click protection. What's somebody going to do? Make an 11 by 17 photo print from it? :lol: You wouldn't even have enough resolution for a decent 4 by 6, so it doesn't bother me. And as for reproducing on the internet? Also not a problem, my personal signature is large enough (but still attractive) that it prevents it from being easily removed from *most* photos.

I also sometimes try to right click on really beatiful photographs to look at the Exif info to see what type of camera, aperture, shutter speed, etc. were used, and having a non-friendly right click plagarization warning is not fun.

Basically, if somebody wants to save your photograph, they will. The absolute ONLY way to prevent someone from saving it, is to *NOT* put it on the internet if you're really that bothered. Simple as that.



*Edit* To add to my last statements, I have also been known to close a window with a digital gallery, nomatter how nice the pictures, if the right click disabling or flash has bugged me enough, so I don't think the benefit is as great as the loss in this respect.

[Zilly]

intresting way round hiding the page sorce just hit the return button a couple of hundred times when your at the top of the html itll all disaperar somewhere down the bottom :D

[SoaringUSAEagle]

intresting way round hiding the page sorce just hit the return button a couple of hundred times when your at the top of the html itll all disaperar somewhere down the bottom :D

Yeah but even then the scroll bar will let people know there is something down below.

[Zilly]

yea but when its a fair old way down the page it takes a while to find and most people dont even register the scroll bar found it quite effective on my site when testing on people

[Big WIll]

You can disable Print Screen
You can disable printing of pages
You can disable Clipboard
You can disable Right Click and Left Click
You can disable seeing the image by using a transparent image over the top.
You can encrypt the .html so users cannot do it

You can disable most things however the majority only work in Internet Explorer you can use other image software to bypass it, you can wip out a digital camera and just take a photo of the image on your screen or even easier you can look in your computers cache of the site and pick it out!

However this plan if all our implemented effectivly will stop i would say 75% of the average internet user from getting at your images, most users use Internet explorer and most have no idea about source files.

Do what you think is best, think who your members/customers etc our and try and stop the majority.

Check out my gallery, i implement most of the above and it stops quite a few of my members who have not much idea on using the internet. I know its easy to bypass they dont!

[tommykjensen]

You can disable seeing the image by using a transparent image over the top.


Hmm whats the point in putting them on the internet then :p

[aLFaDaRK]

You can disable Print Screen
You can disable printing of pages
You can disable Clipboard
You can disable Right Click and Left Click
You can disable seeing the image by using a transparent image over the top.
You can encrypt the .html so users cannot do it

Actually, the methods you used on your website don't all work.

I'll go through a routine of methods to see which work in Internet Explorer 7:

- Ok, right click obviously won't work, and left click doesn't help in any way either.
- Instead, I try Print Screen, which is supposed to be disabled. It worked fine, I already have your image in photoshop if I want it. But I'll go through more methods just to check. (And by the way, the script that should be preventing both this and the clipboard from working created a security warning on my computer asking if I wanted to allow it. I obviously declined, as would most other people.)
- I click and drag your image onto the tabs in I.E. 7, but it's a transparent gif, so it's a background image, that method won't work.
- I change my internet settings to print backgrounds and images, and go to print, hum and unfriendly message, that's not very nice. :( So instead, I save the website, delete the <link rel> line of code, and print it again...but printing just the image itself is easier.
- I go to view source, I found the image in about 10 seconds by searching for the words above the image and copying the table's background image. Now I can save the image, print the image, copy the image, do anything I want with it, the HTML doesn't seem to be encrypted at all.
- Finally, I go to Page > Web Page Privacy Policy. It shows a list of every image and every URL on the page. I look for something that looks distinctly like the image and find "IMG_6376" in one of the file names. So I copy that url, paste into the browser, and I have the image once more.

Now just for good measure, I open the same page into firefox..

First, the right click and left click both still work, though an annoying popup comes up everytime I do. Now I also have a plugin for my firefox called "Web Developer", so I turn off javascript and left click, right click, and everything else all work fine now. I also disable background images and watch the image disappear, which lets me know what I have to do.

- Right click on the image > View Background Image, and I have it already
- Alternatively, I view source, once again, I have the image in seconds.
- Of course, Print Screen still works so I can use that method as well
- Printing won't work again, but I can save the page and print from there after deleting the annoying link rel line again, but since it was so easy to get the image anyway, I could just print from there.

Should I try opera? Sure why not.

Well the right and left click scripts aren't working in opera for whatever reason, but just in case I disable javascript.

- Good ol' view source never lets me down, I have the image in seconds
- Printing won't work again, but I can save it again and print it from there again..
- If I wanted, I could also add my own stylesheet to employ on your website (this can be done with firefox too) which would disable to transparent image that blocks the background image, but anyone who can do this could also just view source ;)
- I also know for a fact that there are web development addons for Opera which would allow getting the image as fast as firefox did, but I'm not a big opera user so I don't use one.


Anyway, that was fun, but the real point is...if somebody wants to save something from your site...they will.

If you don't want people saving things, the ONLY, and I mean ONLY solution is to remove it from the internet. There's nothing wrong with people saving an image because they like it. I like plenty of images and save them, but I don't necissarily want to buy a print of it, and I definately don't contemplate selling super super low resolution prints for profit. :rolleyes: Annoying scripts which prevent right click, left click, highlighting, saving, and printing do not do any good. All they do is annoy an innocent user who is a potential customer. If I wasn't a complete computer nerd, a security warning from a website saying it's trying to access something would make me leave immediately! And right click scripts, and rude printing scripts probably do the same.

So please, to anyone using scripts like this, they aren't doing you any good, they're not doing your customers any good, and they aren't preventing anyone from saving things, so please, PLEASE remove them. ;)

[3Turner]

I'm serious I will change all the settings on my site if you can tell me one good reason to have the right click option on when you are viewing my simpleviewer gallery


I have read through all the posts and agree with most things said before. Especially the fact that is it very annoying to get to a site and try to right click only to find that it is disabled. Now, I have not seen it mentioned before since all conversation is with saving the image file, but I usually right click on a photo that is not in a flash slideshow presentation to view the EXIF information. I'll admit, I'm still learning as a photographer (always:oops: ) and when I see something that I would like to try and need the EXIF data, I right-click on the photo. I pretty much don't even waste my time trying to email someone to ask how its done unless I know they are on this board. My 2cents anyway.

[soho]

Not wanting to address any of the rhetoric in this thread I will say the following. If someone saves the webpage to their computer they have the file. If somebody loads your site into their browser they have the image. If somebody searches for the filename in their temp cache they have the image. If you are stupid, or lazy, or ignorant and have lax security protocols then they have your image. This morning I noticed about 6 members here who have totally insecure webpages- accidentally. If you allow people to navigate your directories in their browser they can have all of your files at once. If you allow people to access your .css files, javascript files, or have a weak ftp password they have your files. I could go on and on but why?

At some point in time "the average joe", yes meaning you because the majority of people are average joes; hence the name, will be able to say I want that image. Then, the average joe will go to his cache and download your images. Can you tell I don't like the phrase average joe yet? I have a very good friend named Joe. Also please excuse my blatant use of the words "you" and "I". I'm addressing a hypothetical person.

Where the problem lies is in image quality. Will there be a day when people have 42 inch computer screens? Yes. Will there be a day when d\u speeds will be in excess of 1,000 mbps? Yes. What this means is that in the future if you want to post a "normal" quality image it will have to be print worthy. It's mathematics, really, that dictate this. Exponential technological growth is not going away any time soon. If it reaaaaly make you feel safe inside you can disable right click. Otherwise just accept the potential loss, watermark, watermark, and watermark.

Soho

[aLFaDaRK]

Even with a watermark, it's impossible to protect an image. There are tons of methods of getting rid of watermarks (and I believe even some programs that can do so). So I'll say it again. If you don't want someone to save your image, don't put it on the internet.

I leave all my images for the most part unwatermarked, and (except on size-limited forums, etc.) with a maximum height or width of 1024 pixels. This can't even print to a decent size with decent resolution, but paranoid photographers often have their images at an even smaller 200 pixels maximum width or height. Me, with a large screen resolution of 2560x1024, and others with similar large screen resolutions, can barely even see the photograph. So what's the point?

[kckong]

but I usually right click on a photo that is not in a flash slideshow presentation to view the EXIF information.
That's interesting. I've been trying to figure out a way to read exif data without installing something like Opanda. Can I ask which browser has this ability to read exif data using right click? Thanks

About theft prevention, I've said it before - as long as browsers cache images - there's no foolproof way (see alfadark's test results). In fact, browser makers seem to be going in the direction of making it easier to save images from the net (legitimate = share pictures; illegitimate = steal pictures ... haha yin and yang again :) )

[aLFaDaRK]

That's interesting. I've been trying to figure out a way to read exif data without installing something like Opanda. Can I ask which browser has this ability to read exif data using right click? Thanks

About theft prevention, I've said it before - as long as browsers cache images - there's no foolproof way (see alfadark's test results). In fact, browser makers seem to be going in the direction of making it easier to save images from the net (legitimate = share pictures; illegitimate = steal pictures ... haha yin and yang again :) )
I believe the only way to view exif is by using an addon like Opanda, that's what I use.

And indeed, browsers are making it easier, because they want users to be aware of what is going on in a website, rather than hiding it, allowing the possibility for advertisements and harmful scripts to find their way onto computers.

[pxl8]

Firefox users can always use the Tools > Page Info > Media panel to see a list of all images, etc. on a page - there's even a handy save as button.

[whiteflyer]

If the image is displayed on screen it can be saved. For example with print screen.

In my opinion disabling right click is useless and just annoying for most users.

Totally agree, disabling right click is just a waste of time, if you don't want anybody to copy your poor quailty web image just don't publish it.

I believe the only way to view exif is by using an addon like Opanda, that's what I use

There are several extensions for Firefox, personally I use Fxif (http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/), this give just a simple amount of data but know that some other exif Extensions will give a very comprehensive list including what custom function are set .

http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/

[aLFaDaRK]

Totally agree, disabling right click is just a waste of time, if you don't want anybody to copy your poor quailty web image just don't publish it.



There are several extensions for Firefox, personally I use Fxif (http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/), this give just a simple amount of data but know that some other exif Extensions will give a very comprehensive list including what custom function are set .

http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/

Well I meant for Internet Explorer, since it doesn't use plugins.

Firefox has a large variety of addons available for this type of thing.

[kckong]

There are several extensions for Firefox, personally I use Fxif (http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/), this give just a simple amount of data but know that some other exif Extensions will give a very comprehensive list including what custom function are set .

http://ted.mielczarek.org/code/mozilla/fxif/
And when you have fxif add-on installed, do you still access the data using right click or through the browser's menu bar? Hope you don't mind me asking 'cos I have no firefox experience :) Might consider it

[3Turner]

kckong,
As alfadark said, I have Opanda installed and that's what I use to view EXIF info. There may be other programs out there as alternatives, but I have yet to find one...really I have not searched for any other...kinda lazy :)

[aLFaDaRK]

Actually I just found a new program that I prefer over Opanda, although it's basically the same, called KUSO EXIF Viewer (I don't know if it's for firefox too, but it works in Internet Explorer)