You added probably the most important piece of information in a comment. You are in the UK.
The UK government has a website about this:
It quite clearly states:
You usually will not own the intellectual property for something you
created as part of your work while you were employed by someone else.
Simply put, NO; it is not OK for you to use the images.
You own no rights to the images/videos you create as an employee; the employer owns them. And there is nothing in your contract about it because it is settled law in the UK.
The Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents)
11 First ownership of ...
sRGB is the STANDARD
So stick with sRGB, it is the STANDARD for web content.
I fail to see any reasons to not use Adobe RGB when it comes to JPEG
files whatever you are posting them on web sites or simply looking at
them in your PC...
The REASON is as stated: sRGB is the DEFAULT STANDARD for all web content, not AdobeRGB. Don't use AdobeRGB for web ...
Yes, there is a breathtaking amount of copyright infringement going on on the internet.
The thing is: where it concerns images, most of it happens with the implicit approval of the copyright holders, who basically like to have their stuff shared and pinned and retweeted all over the internet (at least by consumers) because that gets them attention and ...
I don't think the question, "is .photography currently a good choice for a portfolio website" is the right question to ask. In my opinion, you should be asking if MoritzLost.photography (as an example) is the right brand for you.
If the brand you present (content and portfolio) is good, then it will work for you. If your brand is mediocre, then it probably ...
Bottom line is: you can't protect against this. If the images are shown on the screen, they are in the memory of the client computer and can be extracted one way or another.
You can make this slightly harder, for example by capturing right-clicks in the client's browser but that's only a small hurdle for people to jump over - they can either install a ...
a) The first rule. If you do not want anyone to use your photos, do not publish them.
Once they are published they can be "pirated" in some way or another.
b) Be very clear on the licence of your photos.
Probably you can licence some under a creative commons one, or on the contrary, state that you can not use them in anyway without a fee ...
No. Photostream is a view of all photographs in the account. Flickr offers Albums, Galleries, and Collections, where you can arrange groups of photographs together as you'd like, but the photostream (and once it comes out of beta, the Camera Roll) will, according to Flickr staff comments, always be the full view of any photographs set to be publicly ...
What about displaying
a low-quality and low-resolution thumbnail, to advertise what image they are about to pay for; and
a small detail in full resolution and final quality, to advertise what quality they are about to pay for?
Not all browsers support colour management, and if they don't, they'll act like the images are encoded in sRGB. Since sRGB is also the
default for images without an embedded profile, this is the safest option for images intended to be viewed via web browser.
It doesn't make much of a difference whether you embed sRGB or no profile at all.
PS does have an ...
Ideally, output sharpening is always dependent on the target medium. Optimal quality needs an image which was resized and sharpened for the intended viewing conditions.
A high-res display needs a larger image than a low-res display, and a screen needs differnt sharpening than a print, all of which should, eg., be handled automatically by the Lightroom ...
What is the best resolution and quality for website
The answer is that there are, and must be, several per image.
You should consider using a responsive web-design and using HTML5 and CSS3 to serve up a version of the image suited to the size and resolution of the viewing device.
The optimum image for an iPhone is different to that for ...
The best resolution for a normal website is exactly 1-to-1.
IE you want to display an image at 200 pixel width, you should save it to 200 pixel width.
forget DPI as its entirely irrelevant when displayed on screen.
Quality (JPG) should be as low as possible without affecting the image quality too much, usually around 65-85% - of course it depends on the ...
XnView allows you to batch process files, while adding all sorts of filters.
You can probably achieve something similar as "sharpen, quality 38, blur 0.3" by fiddling a little bit with all the options and filters.
Use a decent camera, not your cell phone.
Bring lighting equipment to properly and consistently illuminate your subject. Know how to use it to produce the best result.
Have each person pose in the same way. Usually at a 3/4 angle to the camera with their head turned back towards the camera. The light should be at either camera left or right and aiming at a ...
I pretty much was in the exact same situation as the OP. I wanted a simple portfolio site that wasn't a gallery host (flickr, 500px), wasn't ugly (Coppermine, ZenPhoto, Pwigo), wasn't full of security holes (Gallery2 no longer being updated, anything WordPress based), and I could self host. Open source would've been awesome, but I was also willing to pay for ...
When did you type a complete web address in a browser the last time?
(I can't remember)
Typically, people google addresses or have a link from somewhere.
Therefore, it matters little how the real address is made up - it should have some recognizability and sound 'real' (so efoth.fkfhry.kh might not be a great choice), but otherwise, whatever works and is ...
The most important thing is your time. Most photographers attempt to recoup the cost of their time shooting in the sale of prints. To me, this is a faaaaaaaaar outdated business model.
Sometimes we don't get to choose our clients, as in the case of contracting with local high schools to do senior portraits. In these cases, you are contracted to shoot ...
Pannellum can do exactly this, especially since you mention you are willing to self-host. The project is well-documented with sample code snippets and reference materials for each feature.
It also has a multi-resolution feature for very large images, to make viewing them more practical.
Adobe RGB is converted to sRGB in cheap monitors right?
Not always. A lot depends on whether the color profile is properly embedded in the image file and whether or not the rendering application pays attention to the embedded color profile instead of automatically rendering in sRGB.
Even when Adobe RGB is converted to sRGB, the colors both spaces have in ...
Since your large image has a resolution of 1280 x 854, then all you need is a camera that can do 1280x854 => 1,093,120 pixels, or 1 megapixel (MP) or higher. You could probably even use a frame capture from 1080 HD video (1920x1080 pixels) or a smartphone camera.
In other words, any digital camera with a resolution of more than 1 megapixel is likely to be ...
Lychee is a free photo-management tool, which runs on your server or web-space.
Lychee is open source, written in php, and attempts to provide a modern photo management interface through a web browser.
I've created a really simple and fast self-hosted PHP photographer portfolio
It's called Turbo Photo Portfolio. It is far simpler than the software in other answers - all you have to do is put your photos in a certain file structure as well as changing the about file and it's done!
My photography website currently uses it with PHP and nginx.
After research (checked over 15 galleries) I found PhotoShow that fulfils my requirements and does the job.
The installation as a web application is quite simple. It works without database and needs only path to photos directory. It keeps album and photos structure according to file system hierarchy.
Additionally it allows to create users and grants them ...
It depends if the images were released and under what conditions. Generally speaking, in most cases the creator of an image has the copyright for it and it can only be used with their permission except of a select few situations known as "fair use". Fair Use varies by legal jurisdiction and consists of the situations in which it is legally deemed to be in ...
Don't change the resolution of the image. The resolution is irrelevant when you display images in a web page. The browser only cares about the pixel dimensions of the image.
Just resize the image to the pixel dimensions that you want.
If you then want to set the resolution (although the browser doesn't care), use the Image Size settings again, but uncheck ...