How can we protect our image being copied from our web site?
Can we disable copying image content from our website or any?
You cannot stop an image from being downloaded from your web site. If this image is visible somehow on the site it means that clients already have it. You could add watermarks to the original to claim copyright. Some other techniques might involve incorporating the image into a Flash movie which would make it harder but not impossible to retrieve.
IMHO clearly stating copyright ownership of the images somewhere on your site should be enough.
You cannot protect your images from copying. You can add watermark or some other artefact to it to discourage people from copying it, but you cannot prevent it (if you want it to be shown on your webpage, it is publicly available).
You may find this article as useful: Your images are a virus. They are EVERYWHERE on the Internet
You can't prevent image copying from your website, if it is served to the clients' browsers it can be copied.
"User saw your images" means, he/she have already downloaded to his computer. But maybe you could put some trick to block users who are not advance on computer usage.
For example;
Disabling right click with javascript etc. (Not block us but blocks someones :) ) as described
You can try using a script and a transparent Gif or PNG overlay that is positioned over the image.
If the user back click they would end up with a blank image instead. This can be a little frustrating for them, and can sometimes be a bit difficult to figure out.
This may offer some low level help, unless the person is using a screen capture tool.
Related
My WordPress website takes a lot of time to load pages, a problem that many of us face. I used GT metrix to check my WordPress page and then checked my website waterfall.
One thing I saw taking more than half time of my page is an image which is not uploaded in my website.
check this image of gt metrix waterfall:
I checked it, and I found this is an image which I have not used in my entire webpage. Also I could not find where is this image used.
Same thing happens in different pages that has different images to it.
I deleted one image from my media but now when I check the GT metrix waterfall I get a 404 error code which means its still trying to load that image and I cannot find it.
This is a theme which I had purchased and its not a popular theme like divi or ocean and hence could not contact the support.
How to check where a particular image is used in my webpage using
the media library (can I do that?)
How to find out and remove this image? Or at least is there a way where I can delete the image from the library and hence my webpage should not look for this image wasting its time instead of getting a 404 code
Your problem is quite common indeed, for your specific case i can suggest by starting to search the image name in both code + DB, it MUST be somewhere.
If you cannot find it inside your stuff there's only one answer left: there's some JS third party script that is loading that for you, but in this case i seriously dubt it would be in the same domain as your site.
Using the media library there's not much you can understand, if you are VERY lucky it will have a message like "attached to" but that thing cover like 10% of the cases, most of the time the image ARE used but are not attached to anything like a post, so the media library won't tell you anything
I've had this happen before a few times, too. Isn't it frustrating!? If you could provide a URL, I (and others, I'm sure) would be happy to take a look and try to figure out what's going on. :)
I want to have a website page load images faster or where the images don't stop the user from seeing the text on the pages before the images finish loading.
1. if I have text on a website page. Does the text render first so the user can see text while the images are still loading?
2. If i have 3 mb of images and have my server that is hosting the website render 1.5 and then move the other 1.5mb to something like flickr and have the image source point to flickr, will that be better and load faster. Or say I just have all the images pull from flickr?
Please help me.
Its a WordPress site, and Clouldflare free cdn does something weird to my theme. So not an option. I also don't want to lazy load for other reason.
EDIT : o yea, if I host all the images on Flickr does that give away link juice (Domain Authority Rank)?
Images do increase overall load time, but they aren't render blocking. The whole page will render (barring render-blocking CSS or Scripts) and images will pop in when they are done. If you want to avoid that flash, you can lazy-load them, or otherwise put the final image's sizes on a container element, so the text is already "moved".
You can't really "Speed Up" image loads. The best thing to do is cut down on the number of images, if applicable, and lazy-load any that don't need to be requested initially. The next best thing (and arguably more important overall, I suppose) is to optimize your images. There are a handful of WordPress plugins that will do this for you, or you can do it in PhotoShop - and even some image CDN's will do it. This basically means, don't load a 1MB image if you don't have to, for "web display" purposes, you can serve a 200kb image that looks almost as good.
A side point, you can "speed them up" a little by having them served from a faster server, but that goes for anything web related. Throw it on better hardware to get better performance (for the most part).
If they are large images, you should first and foremost, optimize them. Make sure they are the smallest file size possible. Also, don't bother splitting "1.5mb" of them over to another host. Either upload them directly all through a CDN (some even tie into your WP Library, like Cloudinary), or keep them local to your site. You'll save yourself some headaches later.
If you have a photo heavy website (photography or other types of galleries), 3mb isn't really an awful lot - but again it's best to serve a more compressed image, you can even link the image or a button to the "full resolution" one.
I am having some problems with browsers displaying images correctly. Most of the browsers are affected except Chrome.
The problem here seems to be the caching problem of images. I am not very sure if this is the case, so I will tell you guys what I did.
My page allows users to upload their photos. So these uploaded photos will be saved into a folder. The user will then use the crop tool to crop their images to their preference, and saved them back to the same folder again. If they chose to use the same name, the image will be overwritten.
Here comes the problem. In Chrome, the browser will show the new cropped images, but not for the other browsers. If the image was renamed, then this won't happen either. Is there anyway to solve this?
Try to add a new guid at the end of the filenames as image.jpg?id=asdf
Change the file name each time you save. You really need caching, but you don't want it to happen at the wrong times. Adding a random number will prevent browsers from caching images at all, prevent http.sys level caching, and prevent any edge caching you implement from working.
Sure, you can embed a YouTube video on any site, but the content ultimately must come from their server. What technology(ies) do they have that prevents us from saving/redistributing content?
From a protocol standpoint, you would think that anything that comes over the wire could be saved. I hope I am not the only guy on Earth who does not know how to "save" a YouTube video...
There are a couple of plugins for Firefox out there that let you save the content. Basically it parses the sourcecode and looks for the videofile (either .flv or .mp4) and downloads that directly. The flash player on the page just plays the supplied file. They could of course obfuscate the path to the video file, but that can be reverse engineered as well. They can't really do anything about it, because the video file has to be on the user's computer at some point, or if not, the stream could be intercepted as well.
eg. https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/6584/?src=api
Mostly it's a legal deterrent rather than technical. There are a plethora of programs out there that will allow you to download their video. But there are two things they do that help reduce unauthorized downloads:
Use is flash to control the download and playback.
Hosting video yourself is not cheap, and thus it's much easier to simply leave the video on youtube.
They don't do anything about it. Very likely your Flash viewer downloads a copy and puts in somewhere on your harddrive (under my Linux system with Firefox and Adobe Flash in /tmp). After you are done viewing the file is removed to save disk space, but since it is on your harddrive nothing prevents you from making a copy elsewhere.
You might want to look at the 'analogue hole', in the end, data still has to be displayed on your screen, or get through your speakers and what not. It's always theoretically possible to intercept it at that point, or even just record your audio-out into another machine.
So as far as the analogue hole goes, the only solution is to skip that, in this form:
(source: thisdomainisirrelevant.net)
Which is not that marketable.
Is there any good control or plug-in for uploading multiple photos with preview? As far as I understand it is impossible to preview photo on local computer using just JavaScript. So it has to use Flash or Java.
Thanks, also, I use ASP.NET.
Wait, do you mean show it in a browser window before starting the upload? So does the file have a URI? (Hint: file:///c/users/public/somefile.png is a URI) You can always just link it into an image tag on their browser session.
Now, will a browser let you link a file:/// for image? That I've not tried, but you should; at least you'll learn something from it when you do try.
But using this, there's no reason you can't use a lightbox style image viewer with the local URI.
You could also make use of silverlight 4. If you're looking for something already written you might try using the upload control from gallery which much require some hackery or if you have money to burn then telerik have an upload control but I don't believe it supports previews. This http://www.aurigma.com/Products/ImageUploader/ also looks nifty.