Scanning photos

[xanderma]

Is it true that a professional photographer could tell if you had scanned and therefore copied one of his photos?

I've heard that they can detect it somehow, and that got me wondering - just how do they protect their work from illegal copying now that technology is so readily available in the home?

P.S. I'm not planning to do this, just curious!

[Catso]

If it were a real top quality photo, I would say yes.

Really good photos have far better definition than a copy could ever have and they have an amzing tonal range. These days, a copy will probably involve digitising somehow, and the definition and tones will suffer in the process.

A snap-shot-type photo: more problematical to tell, I think.

[ugly_bob]

Most photos are printed digitally now, especially art prints.
Scanning a photo to produce a decent quality reproduced image will require a drum scanner, which are around �25000 for a decent one. Then you've got to invest in a decent printer in order to get anywhere near the quality you'd get from a professional print house.
The costs prohibit it really, but with the right equipment, it'd be extremely difficult, if not impossible to tell.

[Ethel]

I thought you were asking if a photographer can tell if his photo has been scanned just by looking at the original - not the copy.

[Catso]

The (semi-pro) photo processing company I deal with is always going on about how much their new digital equipment has cost and how good it is, but still I think that once you get to what you might call 'professional' sizes of photos (IE not the postcard-sized stuff) you can still tell the difference when you look closely. A single big print can cost �40, but I don't think the quality compares with a proper, enlarger-made one.

And if anyone knows where I could could prints done the old-fashioned way, please do tell. Everywhere I've found is all digital now.

[xanderma]

Ethel was right, someone told me that a photographer can tell by looking at his original photo whether or not it has been scanned.

This sounded a bit far fetched to me, hence the question.

[ugly_bob]

Can't see how they'd be able to tell, but I'm not a professional photographer. Not heard of this before.

[Catso]

I can't see how they could possibly tell.

[gary baldy]

They do it by turning the picture over!

All original prints if printed professionally should be printed on professional photopaper that carries a copyright notice on the rear.
No pro lab worth their salt would do a copy of a print if it carried such a notice without the consent of the original photographer because it would leave them open to legal action.

If a pro sees his work printed and there is no copyright notice on the rear and they know it has been copied without consent then it is within their rights to sue.