the editor

Lets say hypothetically someone was looking to pay someone edit a photo. And you posted an example. And said person liked sample, asked for a quote.

Then declined to respond, but instead used the image on Facebook within a minute, and when their friends commented on "their work", they took credit for it.

Is that acceptable?

No, but if it was their photo to begin with, there isn't much you can do. If the example photo you posted was yours, then you have a case.

I figured so but I wasn't sure if it would be out of line to say anything about it. It was in a group of photographers. I guess you'd expect a little better from "our kind"

Don't bet on it. Some of the rudest literary critics out there are also authors. Jealousy sneaks in and turns people into schmucks.

abbypanda wrote in post #16475535
Lets say hypothetically someone was looking to pay someone edit a photo. And you posted an example.

Are you saying that someone posts one of their own images/a sample of their work and the potential client takes that image and posts it on FB? If so that would be copyright infringement.

That's why you watermark as "Proof" before they pay.

No, I think it was a case of AP editing another person's image at their request and then they posted it and took credit.

Maybe the OP will clear it up. I took it as someone asked for an paid edit, she provided edit, they approved and asked for a quote. Then they used her edit without responding to quote.

D Thompson wrote in post #16476362
Maybe the OP will clear it up. I took it as someone asked for an paid edit, she provided edit, they approved and asked for a quote. Then they used her edit without responding to quote.

That's correct. That's what I was trying to say. So she doesn't own the copyright, but she got no credit for her processing work. Pretty lame of the original photographer (if they even took the pic in the first place).

People cannot be trusted.
Photographers are people.
Photographers cannot be trusted.

I would take it as a lesson. The advice to put a big watermark with PROOF across the image before they pay, is an excellent one I think.

M_Six wrote in post #16476379
That's correct. That's what I was trying to say. So she doesn't own the copyright, but she got no credit for her processing work. Pretty lame of the original photographer (if they even took the pic in the first place).

Sounds like she didn't get paid either, which is why I suggested the "Proof" watermark. I've done a few paid edits and I provide a watermarked file to approve. Once approved and paid, I send the un-watermarked file.

Good idea, Dennis. Keeps your work protected.

M_Six wrote in post #16476415
Good idea, Dennis. Keeps your work protected.

I may not get credit, but I get paid.