We changed our privacy policy. Read more.

Hot answers tagged

20

Ordinary household bleach will destroy the image. The image is contained within a thin layer of gelatin. Household bleach will separate (lift off) the emulsion from the film base thus destroying the images.


13

I'm not a lawyer, but the terms of use say: You will retain ownership of such User Submitted Materials, and you grant us and our designees a worldwide, non-exclusive, transferable, royalty-free, perpetual irrevocable right and license, with right of sublicense (through multiple tiers), to use, reproduce, distribute (through multiple tiers), create ...


12

As written, this is borderline off-topic. But the answer could apply to photography as well, for example, if taking pictures in a war zone where recognizable faces could be dangerous for the subject. To answer it, we have to look at two things. First, the way the information is stored in an image file. Generally, each pixel is simply represented by triplet ...


8

... a normal shredder for paper actually creates stripes so wide that each is like a complete picture itself ... Most of the shredders you buy for home use don't cut the mustard; you want one that produces small enough pieces that the images would be useless. There's a standard for that, called DIN 66399, that defines source materials, levels of security ...


5

If you're going to 'show them to the world' - you need to ask. That's common courtesy and, more importantly, you may not be ingrained in their lives enough to know if there's a serious reason to not want them up and public. (For example, I have a friend who went through a messy adoption and posting pictures of his kids on Facebook could complicate his life.)...


4

A kitchen blender or food processor would do a pretty good job at converting the film to dust. You might add a slice of bread, some dry beans, or some other dry material to keep things moving inside the container. Used blenders are available in thrift stores for just a dollar or two if you think you wouldn't want to use the appliance for food after blending ...


3

My answer is not exactly of what you want but replying in regard to privacy, as you are concerned about it. You have come to know about Shutterfly that they save the images but you cannot be sure about other sites as well for the following reasons. Somewhere you may get a suggestion about another site that doesn't save but later you may get to know that ...


3

Shutterfly customer support responded after all: We do not have your pictures stored on Shutterfly. You have received the promotional email because the images still appear in the My Shutterfly section. This section was created before your images were deleted off your account. This section is only designed to show you how your images would appear ...


3

In the US, taking pictures on private property without the permission of the property owner is illegal. This is why security guards can and will stop you from taking pictures at, say, the Westfield chain of malls. First Amendment rights only apply if you are on public property and your subjects have no reasonable right to privacy. A person in their own ...


3

The safest, simplest, and cheapest way of destroying the images is to drop the slide film into boiling water. The gelatine-bearing image layers will quickly melt, slide off the film base into a black gelatinous mass which you discard into normal household waste. The plastic (PET) can be put into solid industrial waste although it is recyclable. Without ...


3

There isn't a right or wrong answer here unless your local jurisdiction has laws about it. As long as you are reasonable about what you put online, I don't expect there to be any problems as long as the parents aren't complaining about it. Use your judgement and share the photos you spend time and effort to produce. That said, if they were friend's kids ...


3

What I do on Flickr, which I think works reasonably well: All photos featuring a child are "friends and family" (my children), "family only" (other children in my extended family) or completely private (other people's children). This means that if people do have accounts on Flickr, they get access to the appropriate photos without having to jump through any ...


2

I share via Google Drive or Dropbox with family. There are two options you should consider: (1) Share via Link - This allows anyone with the link to view the photos, but the link is not "public" and, therefore, users without the link won't be able to see the photos and they won't show up in search engine results. I tend to use this option for photos of ...


2

Almost a decade late with this answer, but Photoshop's 'Export as…' [the replacement for 'Save for Web'] deletes almost all metadata with little option to keep it; only copyright & contact details remain, if selected. In fact, to preserve metadata, you must use the Save for Web (Legacy) function, which still exists as of Ps 2020. The key commands may ...


2

Another command-line tool that can do this is exiftool, using the option -all=. Here's an example: exiftool -all= image.jpg You can wildcard all files in a directory using the normal Unix-style shell globbing: exiftool -all= *.jpg


2

Laws will differ based on the country you happen to be in. Here in the UK where I live, as of November 2015, we don’t require a permit to shoot non commercial photos in public areas. Currently, the Police in the UK do not have powers to stop you from taking photos in public areas. As there are currently no general privacy laws in the UK, people are free to ...


2

No. Model releases aren't used much in the UK.and there's no legal requirement for one. However you may want to have a contract drawn out between you and the organisation to protect everyone involved's interests and probably a licensing agreements also (detailing usage and what each party is entitled to do). However usual stack disclaimer. I'm not a ...


2

If you are talking about taking a picture of an existing piece of art — "a framed picture" — the answer in most jurisdictions is probably no. Under the Berne Convention, which covers 172 countries, the creator of a work automatically has copyright over any artwork as soon as it is produced — and that includes creating a derivative work. Taking a photograph ...


2

Most image portfolio services (eg Adobe Portfolio, many others) do support an arbitrary number of galleries, each with their own URL and protected with their own password. While slightly inconvenient, setting up one small gallery per client would work. Also, consider simply buying USB sticks or SD cards in cheap bulk, giving everyone their files on their ...


2

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. The information below is general in nature and should not be taken as specific legal advice. If you have a specific legal question you should consult an attorney practicing in your jurisdiction that is familiar with the law and case history regarding the issues you wish to address. The following general information is based on ...


1

Digikam is FOSS, so normally not interested in your data. As far as I can tell the privacy policy is only about using the photo uploaders (Google Drive and others) present in the application. Otherwise the app will run entirely on your computer and doesn't leak information to anyone.


1

I think officially it's not needed, although it depends per country (I'm from the Netherlands). It might also depend if they are published or are used on public internet sites (and the context in which they are published). Side story: Some time ago my parents had their 50 year wedding anniversary, and I made pictures of the houses they lived. I rang the ...


1

Depending on the quantity. If there are just one or two, just moisten the emulsion side which i. s the side facing the screen, wait for a while, scrape it with some sharp object or your finger nail will do. If the number runs to hundreds or thousands, prepare a bucket of water with washing powder, add some bleach if you like, soak the slides in it ...


1

I would suggest just finding a furnace that burns waste and using that. Some dumps may have them and many office buildings and factories do. No, I do not want to keep them as a backup just in case the scanning process later turns out to be suboptimal or I lose my HD's (which is the typical answer I found on the Internet ;-). It's a typical answer ...


1

You won't be able to recover the covered parts of the image but maybe you could find a previous version. If you are using windows you can right click the containing folder and click previous versions. You may find a version in there depending on when your shadow copy runs and how long you left it before editing the image.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible