wally world photo printing

[charlie knighton]

i went to wally world to print a picture from my brother's email family photo, he had emailed it and i put it on a cd

they told me the quality of the photo was too good and they would not sell it to me

[David G Baker]

You can get a release form from your brother. I run in to that problem on occasion because my SO's son in law is a professional photographer and he sends us photos through E-mail. Not sure where you can get the release form, check Online.

[Lee Schierer]

Just go to the self service machines and print the photo. The machines are far less of a hassle than the clerks who work there. You may need to put your photo on a jump drive or SD card. I don't know if the machines accept CD's or not.

[John McClanahan]

I have been a hobbt photographer for 30 years. I would take that as a complement! As Lee said, just do it yourself.

John

[charlie knighton]

i did do the self service, but when i went to pay, the employee said she would not sell them, i did go to another store and there was no problem, just at wally world did i receive the we can not sell them

[Jim Koepke]

i did do the self service, but when i went to pay, the employee said she would not sell them, i did go to another store and there was no problem, just at wally world did i receive the we can not sell them

Maybe WallyWorld doesn't want anyone to think their quality standards have gone up. :eek:

jtk

[charlie knighton]

i did email wally world and told them i liked quality products, and was reasasing my shopping habits in light of their refussal to sell quality photos, i have not heard back from them.

when i purchases the processed picture at another chain store, the purchase price was 20 cents lower, or a 10% savings, depending on what they reply to me i may ask them about their advertizing of the low price store.

[Dave Lehnert]

I took care of the photo processing equipment for a retailer. W-M is big on not processing photo's that look pro shot. My guess (and only a guess) they have been sued over such thing. If YOU did not take the photo, WM was correct in not letting you make prints. IMHO,When they said the quality looked too good, they were referring to the photo's being pro shot VS typical point and shoot photo taking. Copying a pro shot photo is the same as running a copy of a book you purchased. Not allowed by law.
Were the photo's pro shot or taken by your brother?

FYI- Never print anything on the machines you do not want others to see.

[charlie knighton]

Were the photo's pro shot or taken by your brother?




i believe they were pro shot, they were taken on the beach, and they were not in swimsuits, dressed in nice shorts, clean shirts, hair windblown, but not wet

i wanted one 5 x 7 picture, they paid the photgrapher, they were posted on facebook, the picture was emailed to me, i put it on cd, they did not want to print it because the quality was to good.....i thought it was ridiculous

if walmart is #1 in retail sales, they may be targeted by photgraphers and fall down artists, i just wanted the 5 x 7 photo and a 97 cent frame, once they would not let me buy it, i did not buy the frame

[Scott Shepherd]

I don't mean any disrespect, but the photography world is a complicated one that most people don't understand. The copyright law is really clear. In this case, it was shot by a professional, as you said. Your brother paid him for it, but he did not buy the rights to that photo. The original photographer owns the right for that unless your brother bought the rights. If he did, he would have a release form that showed that transfer of ownership. I seriously doubt he did that. My guess is he paid for the shots, and that's what he got. Copying a photo you don't own the rights to, putting it on the internet, and then emailing it to someone else to have printed, is all a violation of copyright law and you were in the wrong.

If you hire someone to take wedding photos, you do not own those photos. The photographer does, unless you specifically buy the complete rights to those photos. So you can't even take your own wedding photos and have copies made because they don't belong to you, even though you hired the photographer and it's you in the photo.

It's a hard thing to wrap your head around, but once you do, you'll realize you can't do much of anything with photos unless you took them yourself.

I think they did the right thing from a legal standpoint.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I have had Walmart and a local photoshop do the same thing for the same reason. They are not participating in something that might be illegal.....anymore than a pawnshop refusing to buy something if they think it might be stolen.

[Dave Lehnert]

i believe they were pro shot, they were taken on the beach, and they were not in swimsuits, dressed in nice shorts, clean shirts, hair windblown, but not wet

i wanted one 5 x 7 picture, they paid the photgrapher, they were posted on facebook, the picture was emailed to me, i put it on cd, they did not want to print it because the quality was to good.....i thought it was ridiculous

if walmart is #1 in retail sales, they may be targeted by photgraphers and fall down artists, i just wanted the 5 x 7 photo and a 97 cent frame, once they would not let me buy it, i did not buy the frame


+1 what Scott said. They refused to print because they looked (and were) pro shot. It is just flat out against the law for them to allow it.
My guess, because of your e-mail, the clerk in the store got a brownie point for sticking to policy.

[sunny nic]

+1 what Scott said. They refused to print because they looked (and were) pro shot. It is just flat out against the law for them to allow it.
My guess, because of your e-mail, the clerk in the store got a brownie point for sticking to policy.
might be true.

[charlie knighton]

i think the law should be changed, imho

i would have to rethink ever using a pro picture taker

wally world should not be sued over a 5 x 7 beach picture of family members, that's stupid , imho

[Scott Shepherd]

Charlie, if you ever want to make your head explode, read up on photography rights. It'll drive you insane. To this day, I can't comprehend hiring someone to take photos of me, my family, and my "event" and then they own the rights to those photos for the rest of their life. That just seems wrong to me. I hired you to take photos of my wedding, when it's over, to me, I should own all the photos and I should be able to do whatever I want with them. That's my opinion. And some photographers will sell you that package.

However, that's not the law. The law says they took it, they own it, period. It would be like you taking a book into Kinkos and asking to copy the entire book.

[David Weaver]

+1 what Scott said. They refused to print because they looked (and were) pro shot. It is just flat out against the law for them to allow it.
My guess, because of your e-mail, the clerk in the store got a brownie point for sticking to policy.

Or "might be against the law" to do it. In this case, it sounds like the photographer was paid for the photo and aware someone else was going to print it. When I got married, my photographer wanted to print the photos, but when he learned that we were moving out of town, he decided he didn't want to deal with it and sold us the DVD of prints. It wasn't free, we paid for it. I don't know how big the pictures are, but they're big and there are 500 of them.

I suppose I could show walmart the bill for the DVD from the guy and they still wouldn't print them. That's fine, their policies are made to remove thinking from people at the ground level - no exceptions. We didn't get them printed at walmart, I can't remember where we went, but in the end we had no issue getting them printed. The photographer was happy (they got paid to be at the wedding and got some extra coin by selling us the DVD) and we were happy because we had a lot more time to decide which photos we wanted to have printed, and didn't have to sit with someone to go through them or look at reduced quality photos.

My sister is a professional photographer. She chooses to make money on the session and not worry so much about the prints. She's up front with her clients about this, they usually don't have a problem paying a high session fee when she describes how it works. I despise photographers who want to take a few photos and then try to lord their ownership of the photos over you as they gouge and gouge, the same as I despise people who offer data maintenance services and then want to charge you over and over above and beyond your contract cost any time you need to access *your* data. Fortunately, I don't ever have to deal with photographers who think it's still the 1950s.

[Terry Wawro]

Think of it this way. You are getting married. There is a local musician that is wonderful and you hire him or her to play and sing at your wedding. They sing and play for you a wonderful heart-touching original song. Your brother videotapes and records the whole thing. Does this give you the rights to sell that artists lyrics to someone else? No. How about selling recordings of them singing? No. Same difference.

Another example. Say for Christmas you get a Kindle. Eager to try it, you download a copy of the Tom Clancy's latest best seller. "Hey I bought this, I should be able to resend a copy for free to all of my friends with Kindles too right? No again.

Now some photographers sell the copyright. If so, great! Just ask them to send a release via email. Print it out and Wally world will be no problem.

[charlie knighton]

i talked today with Mike ___________ from Walmart, we had a polite consersation. basicly he wanted me to bring the cd in and he would look at it, i have already brought the cd to walmart and they declined. i have gotten the picture processed, there seems to be processing in every drug store and big box store. Mike did say they would price check, i did not tell him where i had the cd processed for my one 5 x 7 family photo at a 10% saving (20 cents). i probably burned more gas than the 20 cents, i know the time spent was over 20 cents, and i am sure my blood pressure must have gone up, i wonder if i can sue walmart for raising my blood pressure over one 5 x 7 photo processing. next time i know where i will process my photos.

if you have quality photos, be forewarned

[Scott Shepherd]

Charlie, again, with all due respect, it's not that Walmart treated your poorly, it's that you asked Walmart to do something illegal for you. I don't see how that falls on Walmart. That falls on you. Your blood pressure was up because you asked someone to do something illegal for you and they refused to do it. Again, that's not their issue, that's your issue.

The fact that you found someone ignorant of the law to print it is not surprising, but it doesn't change the fact that if that photographer wanted to, he could sue your new place and sue you as well.

You are in the wrong here, not Walmart.

[charlie knighton]

The fact that you found someone ignorant of the law to print it is not surprising, but it doesn't change the fact that if that photographer wanted to, he could sue your new place and sue you as well.

You are in the wrong here, not Walmart.

we got too many lawyers, just look in the yellow pages

to be sued over a $2 5x7 picture processed is amazing, its not like i wanted 500 prints to sell, i wanted one to put in my living room for myself and whoever visited me to enjoy

at a yard sale i bought some 1928 era watercolors for $5, 3 of them and they were already framed, i also put them in my livnig room
i guess a painting is the same as a photo, it even has the artists name on it.....nobody tried to sue me on that....what is the differance, Scott......the painting was done by an artist......the photo was done by someone with a camera....he was skillful, is pushing a button on a camera the same as being an artist?????

[Matt Meiser]

So I assume you have no problem stealing a candy bar while at Walmart. I mean its under $1, no big deal. Like it or not its the law and you are obligated to follow it. If you don't like it work to get the law changed, not bash someone for following it.

[Scott Shepherd]

That's simple Charlie, you bought the original watercolor paintings. You didn't take the water color painting and copy them, giving a copy to a family member.

It all sounds so simple and clear until it's you that's being taken from. I didn't write the law, I just told you why they wouldn't do it, and how it was their legal obligation to not do it. You can be mad all you want, but the reality of it is that walmart did the right thing.

[charlie knighton]

i did not steal a candy bar

the us has lost many jobs to overseas, i believe one of the reasons is there is a law that a photo that has been paid for cannot be processed with the permission of the buyer, a family member bought it, i just wanted to process it with the technology avaliable to ever customer of every drug store, or big box store, if the quility is good and i took the picture, they would not process it because the quality was too good

[Scott Shepherd]

Okay, Matt's candy bar didn't work, let's try this Charlie. Let's assume you are a photographer for a moment. Let's assume you take photos of a family. You own the rights to the photo, because it's covered under copyright law. Now, let's assume those people take a copy of your photo, give it to a family friend. Now, let's say that they take that photo and use it to create an advertising campaign for Nike. Now Nike is using a photo you took, which you own the rights to, and they are using it for free to market their products and make millions. Would that be okay? It's your photo, they used it without your permission. My guess is you probably wouldn't like it.

I understand your frustration, but this isn't a new law. It's a law that's been around for decades. I don't think you can trace the loss of jobs in the US to something that's been law for over 50 years.

[charlie knighton]

let's say that they take that photo and use it to create an advertising campaign for Nike


its simple, i just wanted photo for my living room, i was not going to print 500 copies, its is not going in an advertising ad or billboard, i simplely wanted one for my living room, i would not want to copy a picture of your family, just my family members

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Charley,

Any way you cut it, the Walmart clerk was doing the right thing by not putting himself or the store in jeopardy of breaking a law.

You may not like the law and that's your right but.....you have no right to expect others to break the law because you don't like it.

Get over it! Somethings in life are important......most aren't.....this isn't.............

[Ken Fitzgerald]

and with that....this thread has run it's course and I'm locking it.