--- In SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com, spudugly@... wrote:
>
>
> The inevitable problem with doing anything on CD is that some
schmuck somewhere is going to rip them from the CD and post them
online.?
> As convenient and encompassing as they can be, it's hard to protect
against theft and redistribution.?
Yeah, see, that's one of my concerns. Of course, I'm sure there
are ways I could make it difficult for people to rip the images, but
even those efforts would be overcome eventually. And unfortunately,
it's still illegal in this country to maul/cripple/seriously
injure/mutilate anyone who is intent on doing wrong, so my options
are probably a bit limited. ;)
Currently, a .rar file of all my "known" work is approximately
210.54 MB (yeah, pay attention to this kind of stuff, even if I don't
make mention of it). I know that some pirates have tried to overcome
the "copy" paper that I currently use, and their efforts usually
result in a poor or faded image. I know the paper does help a bit,
but a lot of folks complain about the color of said paper, the fact
they cannot scan the images without the watermark showing up, and the
negative effect the paper color has on the actual image colors
(though I have played around with the settings a bit to reduce this
effect).
Now, if the digital images on a cd were only scanned at 72 dpi,
that would result in a low-resolution image, suitable for the
computer screen, but not likely to end up as a physical print or high-
definition image file. There are other things that could be done
with the cd images as well, but as I stated earlier, I'm just putting
the idea out there to see if others can find any benefits or
drawbacks to such a version.
--JMH
Received on Mon Apr 28 2008 - 07:39:52 CDT