Why I Now Digitally Caption Copies of Ancestor Photos

In the past few months, I've been increasing my use of digital captioning on copies of scanned ancestor photos. 

It's an easy process: First, I create a digital copy of my scanned original photo. Next, I use photo software to write name and date on the copy. Then I save the photo with a "caption" notation in the file name.

If I'm going to post the photo on a public genealogy website, I now add an attribution to the caption (see photo).

Why digitally caption old family photos?

1. Keeps photo and caption together. Too often, photos and captions are separated. Maybe a relative wrote a note that was (ouch) clipped to a photo or a photo was removed from the album for scanning or storage, leaving the caption behind. With digital captions, descendants and researchers won't wonder who's in the picture (dates and places are a plus).
2. Convenient digital sharing. Especially when I connect with cousins for the first time, captioned digital photos allow me to easily share ancestor faces, names, and dates. It's convenient because the captioned versions are self-explanatory. I can always share non-captioned photos, if needed, because the original scan is intact.
3. Give credit where credit is due. I want to make it crystal clear whose photos these are. I don't obscure a big part of the photo in doing this, but I do want to acknowledge which family is kindly sharing the photo.  

Of course I realize that photos on public blogs (like this) and on public trees are visible to the world and easily copied. 

On genealogy sites such as Ancestry, it's quite common (and encouraged) to have photos and documents saved to other members' trees. The Ancestry system automatically includes the notation of who originally uploaded the image and when. 

That little notation makes all the difference. It credits me as the person responsible for submitting the image, and it acts as cousin bait in case someone wants to get in touch to discuss ancestors. 

This isn't the same as copying from my tree or my blog and moving a photo to an entirely different website.

No copying and reposting without permission

Recently, Judy Russell, the Legal Genealogist, wrote a detailed blog post explaining that copying photos and reposting without permission is illegal. Judy linked to the terms of use for several major genealogy websites. She included an excerpt from Family Search, indicating that users are legally responsible for content they post.

I'd just discovered that someone I don't know had copied some photos from my Ancestry family tree, without my knowledge or permission, and put them on the Family Search tree. Judy's comments encouraged me to take action.

After writing that person to ask whether we are related, with no answer, I tried a more direct approach. I politely and firmly requested that my photos be removed because they violate the Family Search terms of use. I said I would contact officials at Family Search and make them aware of the violation if my photos weren't deleted.

Within one hour, the user answered with a terse note saying the photos were taken down. I confirmed they were gone and responded: "Much appreciated."

My digital attribution ("courtesy: Wood family") is a strong and unambiguous public statement of the source of the photo. If all my public photos had this attribution, I suspect none would have been copied and posted to Family Search.

--

The Genealogy Blog Party's May theme has to do with photography. This is my entry!