Bryan Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 I feel the need to state that, while I do my best to identify shots in these threads, and generally highlight cases where there is doubt, I cannot give a guarantee that the images so identified are those in the publications. In only a minority of cases are the photographers identified there, while the Sunday Times supplements in particular tend to group photo credits in such a way that it not possible to relate them to specific images. Often there are a number of photos that could be the correct selection ( particularly where jet planes are involved!) and you get my best guess. The reverse image search engines (Tineye and Google) although very good, are similarly not, in my experience, 100% accurate. Not defensible in a court of law I fear. You need to look for yourself for confirmation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Of course, Bryan, you and others do a great job. Frightening that we have entered a time when a disclaimer like this perhaps will be necessary to post - perhaps even below each and every observation in the future..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Richmond Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 I feel the need to state that, while I do my best to identify shots in these threads, and generally highlight cases where there is doubt, I cannot give a guarantee that the images so identified are those in the publications. In only a minority of cases are the photographers identified there, while the Sunday Times supplements in particular tend to group photo credits in such a way that it not possible to relate them to specific images. Often there are a number of photos that could be the correct selection ( particularly where jet planes are involved!) and you get my best guess. The reverse image search engines (Tineye and Google) although very good, are similarly not, in my experience, 100% accurate. Not defensible in a court of law I fear. You need to look for yourself for confirmation. I, for one, appreciate the time you spend. I've only done a few myself and know how much effort is involved - and that results can't be guaranteed. Any criticism is unwarranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Clemson Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 I think it beggars belief that any circumstances could arise where a fellow tog had acted in such a way as to make Bryan's statement necessary. I don't know the circumstances but I truly, truly hope it is not a sign of things to come. More power to your elbow Bryan, you and a good few others like you, do a great service for the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Has there been a problem? I think we should be told, as they say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted April 4, 2016 Author Share Posted April 4, 2016 I think it beggars belief that any circumstances could arise where a fellow tog had acted in such a way as to make Bryan's statement necessary. I don't know the circumstances but I truly, truly hope it is not a sign of things to come. More power to your elbow Bryan, you and a good few others like you, do a great service for the rest of us. Just my paranoia Joseph, no-one at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.