sizing photos for online galleries

bauerman wrote in post #2863274
I could care less if I am "rude" to someone trying to walk off with one of my shots for unauthorized use!

I don't disagree with you at all there. The point is that in order to deter 1%-10% or less of people, you're likely annoying a good many more who aren't thieves, into not wanting to return.

It is a subjective point, and I'm not trying to say anyone who uses it is a horrible person or something. If I had good reason to believe it was 90% effective, I might end up using it too. But there are plenty of other ways to get images off of webpages, none of them at all complicated or "secret", that circumvent the javascript r-click. I tend to think the same way as this quote from an article on the subject:

"At best a "no right click" script will keep clueless newbies from stealing your images. I would guess though, that the same people too clueless to get past this method are also too clueless to use the r-click to steal something in the first place."

At any rate, I wasn't really trying to lecture about political correctness. I don't much like political correctness myself. To me it's mostly a numbers game. I don't like irritating the many while deterring the few - especially when those few are likely ones who wouldn't have stolen in the first place - or at most, only wanted to use your image as a pc-desktop wallpaper - which doesn't personally bother me, tho it may bother other people. Those who wanted your work to put on their own websites etc. probably fall into the category of knowing how to get around the r-click block.

Edit: typos and additions...

So called "Right Click Protection" does NOTHING to prevent images being taken off a page, and it's one of the most noticeable signs of an utterly un-professional site. I use mouse gestures in Firefox, many of which use the right mouse button. If I try to so much as go back in my browser's history while browsing a gallery with that turned on, I get an irritating pop-up message. Moreover, it's COMPLETELY ineffective. You can get around it by pressing the spacebar and immediately right-clicking. You can get around it by viewing source and just taking the image file. You can get around it by looking in your browser cache. Hell, you can make it cease to function at all just by disabling Javascript. Hate to break it to you, but there is NO material harm that you're avoiding by using this so called "protection." If anything, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Bombarding users with popups is one of the most surefire ways to get them to leave your site (I know I high-tail it if I know I'm not going to be able to use my back and forward mouse-gestures on a site), and users who have left don't buy many prints.

I guess that I will not sell beiber nor CrazyPuma many prints off my site.............I'm o.k. with that.

It's not us that you have to worry about, it's people who would buy prints, but get irritated at your pointless and, frankly, offensive "protection" measures and go away. People don't like it when you decide to specifically design your site to interrupt their browsing habits. Trust me on this one. My job is tailoring websites to turn visitors into customers, and what you're doing here is going to be turning an awful lot of visitors into ex-visitors, not customers. If you don't have any problem with that, go ahead, have your silly little Javascript trick. If you feel like maximizing the revenue from this site of yours, though, I oh-so-strongly suggest dumping it.

I upload full resolution images to Smugmug and let them deal with resizing.

bieber wrote in post #2915842
It's not us that you have to worry about, it's people who would buy prints, but get irritated at your pointless and, frankly, offensive "protection" measures and go away. People don't like it when you decide to specifically design your site to interrupt their browsing habits. Trust me on this one. My job is tailoring websites to turn visitors into customers, and what you're doing here is going to be turning an awful lot of visitors into ex-visitors, not customers. If you don't have any problem with that, go ahead, have your silly little Javascript trick. If you feel like maximizing the revenue from this site of yours, though, I oh-so-strongly suggest dumping it.

You don't have a overly strong opinion on this topic do you? Come - don't hold back anything - tell me how you really feel.

Right click disabling is very prevalent and most of the top photo hosting sites that I am aware of offer this as a feature to their subscribers. There must be a demand for it, or it would not be offered across such a broad spectrum of different websites. It does have some effectiveness in my opinion as well and it will stay turned on within my galleries.....period. I'm not about selling photos for the most part - I am simply someone that posts photos for friends and families to view.

I have done some weddings and will be doing more this summer and will use my site to let the couples preview their photos. I will let you know if the disabled right click feature in my galleries sends these customers of mine screaming into the hills...............

The kind of people that would find right click disabling "offensive" or an encroachment upon to their civil liberties I would probably rather not work with anyway.

It's not an encroachment on civil liberties, it's just an annoyance. And when someone goes out of their way to unnecessarily annoy you, it pisses you off. I'm not talking about you losing customers that you've arranged and met with in person; I'm talking about the people who's first impression of you comes from your site, and those visitors are extremely finicky. On average, something as seemingly trivial as a four or more second page load time will send these people running; how do you think they're going to put up with ridiculous irritating popups?

But whatever. Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. I don't even know where your gallery is, just thought I'd give you a little professional advice, it's not my problem if you ignore it. Just as a parting note, though, why don't you take a look at the sites of some really famous photographers. Ansel Adams, Arthur Morris, Moose Peterson, Ken Rockwell. Tell me how many of those sites have "right-click protection."

Tell you what - when I get to be as good as any of those people that you mention - I will turn right click protection off on my galleries!

For someone that has not even reached their 19th birthday - you are very uptight about this.........you need to relax - you have a lot of years ahead of you that will be full of things to really worry about.

Have a good weekend.

I think companies offer it more as sales pitch than anything else. It's a feature they can "brag" about and it sounds impressive to anyone who doesn't know better, just like webhosts brag about 100,000GB/unlimited bandwidth per month for $5 when a shared (non-dedicated) hosting server is likely to boot you out for other things long before you reach that limit.

The thing I tend to use r-click for a lot is the open-link-in-new-window/tab (since most thumbnails pictures are links these days). It's very automatic habit; I like tons of windows open so I can always go back to a specific page w/out having to wade thru a site all over again; thus the r-click block is too irritating. I'm not changing my habits just to surf a website.

Smugmug looks like a very nice site, but after a couple dozen r-clicks just trying to open links in new windows, I left. Each their own as they say.

bieber wrote in post #2919945
........... Just as a parting note, though, why don't you take a look at the sites of some really famous photographers. Ansel Adams, Arthur Morris, Moose Peterson, Ken Rockwell. Tell me how many of those sites have "right-click protection."

Ken Rockwell? How'd he get on that list??? Thanks for the discussion, guys, learned a lot here. Never has right clicking been talked about with such panache!