US Patent Office Grants 'Photography Against A White Background' Patent To Amazon
from the maybe-someone-at-the-office-checked-the-wrong-box? dept
The US Patent and Trademark Office is frequently maligned for its baffling/terrible decisions... and rightfully so. Because this is exactly the sort of thing for which the USPTO should be maligned. Udi Tirosh at DIY Photography has uncovered a recently granted patent for the previously-unheard of process of photographing things/people against a white backdrop... to of all companies, Amazon.
I am not really sure how to tag this other than a big #fail for the USPTO, or a huge Kudos for Amazon's IP attorneys. In a patent simply called Studio arrangement Amazon took IP ownership on what we all call shooting against a seamless white backdrop.Here's a photo of Amazon's bold new photography concept (US Patent 8,676,045), which pretty much looks like every photo studio in the history of photo studios.
There's plenty of technical text to separate Amazon's white-backdropped photo studio from the thousands in existence prior to 2011 (the date of filing), which shows just how innovative Amazon's concept is:
a background comprising a white cyclorama; a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the white cyclorama; an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis, the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens, the at least one image capture device further configured with an ISO setting of about three hundred twenty and an f-stop value of about 5.6...Amazon does more explaining later on, differentiating its proprietary white-background photo thing from others exactly like it by pointing out that prior art often refers to image retouching, green screens or other forms of image manipulation. Amazon's technique is apparently the purest of the pure, being only the photographer, the photographed object/person, the white background, a number of front lights/back lights and some sort of object separating the subject from the ground below it.
How does this breakthrough work in practice? Glad you asked.
1. Turn back lights on.
2. Turn front lights on.
3. Position thing on platform.
4. Take picture.
Now, we'll note that in all fairness (HAHAHAHA), Amazon filed this application back in the early days of photography, circa 2011. Nearly three years later, that foresight has paid off, and Amazon can now corner the market on taking pictures in front of a white background.
Currently, prior art input is being sought at Stack Exchange's Ask Patents, but questions about the patent's viability may come down to the very specific specifics listed above. On one hand, the listed stipulations make it easier to route around. On the other hand, two of the specifics are hedged with the word "about," leaving only the 85mm lens specification as truly "unique."
Is Amazon about to start sending demand letters to photo studios? That seems unlikely. But it does raise the question as to why this patent was sought in the first place. If this is how Amazon performs its product photography, it seems like it could have been handled in an internal document, rather than pushed through the patent office. Even if it's never used for trolling, it's still on record as "something Amazon thought up," rather than nowhere to be found as studio setups for shooting against a white background have been in use for several decades.
Chalk up another loss in the USPTO's column and a baffling, oblique "win" for Amazon's IP legal team, which now "owns" an obvious method.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: patents, photography, uspto, white background
Companies: amazon
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh well, it'll only cost a few million to overturn when it's first "enforced" - no harm, no foul. (Damned idiot patent examiners...)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Prior Art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The dumb thing in the setup...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WTF?
That is the only way I can rationally explain this...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This makes me realize I am in the wrong line of work
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This makes me realize I am in the wrong line of work
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Your studio has ROUNDED CORNERS?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why are there people working in the patent office?
http://www.google.com/patents/US5152223
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Think I'll become a patent troll!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Seriously, this is a very old studio procedure with numerous variations.
Wait, hold the presses, movies and tv stations often use a similar technique of shooting actors/weather reports against a (blue?) screen and then superimposing the background image on the screen. I see Amazon's strategy now, sue the movie studies and tv station owners for patent infringement and make HUGE amounts of money off the deep pockets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091119/0237527002.shtml
All these big companies are in on it and soon there will be no one in America (as was aptly pointed out yesterday) who does not infringe on patent breaking and copyright destroying behaviours. Soon, someone will patent various breathing methods as part of exercise method while holding by certain irrelevant gadget like a dumbbell as unique and ground breaking technology to enhance health of individuals. The breathing techniques will be copyrighted. Those dumbbells will have a particular shape that will be patented--like a geometric (octagonal) shape with rounded corners.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That gives me an idea...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Same with the patent. If Amazon finds someone becoming too competitive with them, and starting to threaten their profits, and does so using photography to display the products, Amazon has a perfect legal sword to use.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: that suck
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reform idea
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
My hypothesis? Someone high up in the legal department either wants to make a point about just how ridiculous US patent law has got, or was morbidly curious about just how much they could get away with. Or maybe someone bet them a bottle of good bourbon they couldn't get away with it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New and Original????????
The first in about 1994 was a room with four corners and all wall-floor junctions with a soft radius. One half, two walls and a corner as well as a portion of the floor, painted white and the other half painted photo grey. Very large studio.
Second in 1998, all walls and floor painted flat white. Used for the photography of large goods - furniture, machinery etc.
This is not new, its SOP.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Prior Art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: That gives me an idea...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Are we therein yet?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No test for obviousness
Without such a test, the PTO can really only reject applications based on prior art.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
On an unrelated note, you too can now own an official Just Another Anonymous Troll brand Doesn't-Infringe-On-Amazon's-Ridiculous-Patent studio background! It's exactly the same as a regular white background, except it has a graphic of a middle finger in the center with the words; "F U Amazon"!
Order one today! We distribute solely through Amazon.com, just for spite!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The reason
The answer is easy: to bump up the number of patents Amazon has. Since far too many people believe that having patents is the same thing as being innovative, having more patents makes a company apparently more innovative.
It doesn't matter if the patents are bullshit. I think that's one of the reasons there are so many bullshit patents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You have no idea how many pictures I have had come out badly because of my studio's all mauve background.
Even if I get a good picture, I have to use a mauve background on my website to have the pictures look better, but that hurts my eyes and I am sure some of my customers have not liked it.
I never even considered white. I mean who would? I could have gone years randomly selecting background colors before coming across it - and then, if I happened to have just taken a bad picture, I may have never given it due consideration.
I'm contacting Amazon right now to try to license this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Why are there people working in the patent office?
Note: A document placement sensor and a conveyor will be nice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Basically they have nothing to do at all with Amazon day-to-day and are trying desperately to justify there existence as the useless 'departments' get culled one by one. (Amazon has culled DOZENS of 'areas' that have no effect on how Amazon runs and have bunches of staff collecting a salary based on sitting on their asses doing nothing at all (literally nothing - they have zero work to do).
I have no Doubt Jeff Bezos' culling-teams will take notice of this and have another department in their sights ready to be erased.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Prior art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Are we the dumbest people on the planet or do we simply allow stupid fools to run our lives, with imbecilic results?
Einstein was a patent clerk in the Swiss patent office. I'll bet he would have said something akin to "Sind Sie ein F---ing Moron?' when asked to allow a patent on this.
But then, what do I know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: why this patent was sought in the first place
Patent troll brings suit.
Defendant's attorney: that's a ridiculous patent
Troll's attorney: the USPTO doesn't issue ridiculous patents.
Defendant's attorney: Exhibit A: 8,676,045B1
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That would not solve the problem, as the next examiner would just follow the exact same rules. The problem is not stupid examiners, the problem is a stupid system.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The dumb thing in the setup...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Standing orders for the legal dept
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Standing orders for the legal dept
I had some sympathy for this argument when it was first raised, but as I've watched things play out since then, I don't think that it actually works anywhere near well enough to call it "necessary". Holding defensive patents doesn't seem to have prevented or reduced the cost of getting sued.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So how will Amazon prove infringment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Amazon patents breathing
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: That gives me an idea...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
stick figures and line drawings
I also have a patent pending on the number "7", which cannot appear in any digit of any length, unless I am paid $403.07 cents. Oops, just used it, got to go and cut myself a check!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: The reason
The validity of a patent is somewhat meaningless to small to mid-sized businesses because the process to invalidate them is so much more expensive than licensing them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Standing orders for the legal dept
[ link to this | view in thread ]
circa 1960
Hell, I have done this sorta thing myself prior to 2011.
N.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So how will Amazon prove infringment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
My turn
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I am going to patent a grey background
Profit!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reform idea
[ link to this | view in thread ]
1. A studio arrangement, comprising: a background comprising a white cyclorama;
a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the white cyclorama;
an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis, the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens, the at least one image capture device further configured with an ISO setting of about three hundred twenty and an f-stop value of about 5.6;
an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background in the longitudinal axis, the front light source being directed toward a subject on the elevated platform;
a first rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the first rear light source positioned below a top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at an upward angle relative to a floor level;
a second rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the second rear light source positioned above the top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at a downward angle relative to the floor level;
a third rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in a lateral axis intersecting the elevated platform and being substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, the third rear light source further positioned adjacent to a side of the elevated platform; and a fourth rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in the lateral axis adjacent to an opposing side of the elevated platform relative to the third rear light source;
wherein a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears white and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to the image capture device;
and the first rear light source, the second rear light source, the third rear light source, and the fourth rear light source comprise a combined intensity greater than the front light source according to about a 10:3 ratio.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Reform idea
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
... on a computer.
... on the internet.
... on a smart phone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Part of the issue is, the patent examiner has to be able to support rejections with documented evidence (by and large) and the amount of time they have to spend on an application doesn't necessarily allow them to do everything they need. For this patent, since the claim is specific on things like ISO, f-stop, and ratio between light intensities, the patent examiner has to be able to point to that combination out there somewhere.
On a positive note, even though the claim has some wiggle room built in, it's probably going to be fairly limited to the values stated.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The reason
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If only we had photographic evidence of prior art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Magoo in 2016
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Reform idea
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"The Amazon Patent"
1. A studio arrangement, comprising:
a background comprising a white cyclorama;
a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the white cyclorama;
an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis, the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens, the at least one image capture device further configured with an ISO setting of about three hundred twenty and an f-stop value of about 5.6;
an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background in the longitudinal axis, the front light source being directed toward a subject on the elevated platform;
a first rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the first rear light source positioned below a top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at an upward angle relative to a floor level;
a second rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the second rear light source positioned above the top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at a downward angle relative to the floor level;
a third rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in a lateral axis intersecting the elevated platform and being substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, the third rear light source further positioned adjacent to a side of the elevated platform; and
a fourth rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in the lateral axis adjacent to an opposing side of the elevated platform relative to the third rear light source; wherein
a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears white and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to the image capture device; and
the first rear light source, the second rear light source, the third rear light source, and the fourth rear light source comprise a combined intensity greater than the front light source according to about a 10:3 ratio.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent Attorney
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm considering submitting a new patent application
I am almost certain that my application will be the very first, and therefore subsequent royalties will flow in my direction.
I will also need to prepare myself for TV interviews around the world...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "The Amazon Patent"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
USPTO bought and sold by Amazon
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This makes me realize I am in the wrong line of work
for Etsy, they do have a requirement
you must be stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Prior Art
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent for white backgropund
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Patent Attorney
What about this:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140507/04102327144/us-patent-office-grants-photography-again st-white-background-patent-to-amazon.shtml#c324
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
calm down rubes
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: legal sword
[ link to this | view in thread ]
85mm F5.6
Trying to patent a Studio lens, being used with a white background at it's industry known sharpest setting is rediculous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"It should be emphasized that the above-described embodiments of the present disclosure are merely possible examples of implementations set forth for a clear understanding of the principles of the disclosure. Many variations and modifications may be made to the above-described embodiment(s) without departing substantially from the spirit and principles of the disclosure. All such modifications and variations are intended to be included herein within the scope of this disclosure and protected by the following claims."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They are interested in no-one or anything but themselves and their bottom line.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Patent Attorney
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Think I'll become a patent troll!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This is bullshit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Corporate Trolling
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps not (but if not, then why do they continue to enforce their BS 1-click patent?). However, that they were willing to pull such a stunt in their earlier days does speak volumes about their corporate character: they have no problem with asserting BS patents when it benefits them to do so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I am an examiner. The thing that most of you don't seem to understand is that what matters is what is in the claim(s). Before Mikey and Timmy and whoever else at Techdirt go off on your little anti-patenting, anti-USPTO tirades maybe you should figure out just what a patent is and what it isn't. Then maybe you all wouldn't sound like idiots thinking you can do my job better than me :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Why do the other parts of the patent application even exist?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Serious Question...
And WTF is " ISO setting of about three hundred twenty" --- "about" ---- What exactly defines "about" how can that would even be in a patent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The dumb thing in the setup...
The ISO and f-stop settings are useless if light sources and their distances to the subject and background as well as their intensities are not appropriate for the exposure.
Why bother with those details without that information also?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ISO 200
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This makes me realize I am in the wrong line of work
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Think I'll become a patent troll!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Because bad patents always get caught and revoked, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"It should be noted that angles, dimensions, distances, settings, parameters, and other numerical data may or may not be expressed herein in a range format. It is to be understood that the numerical data is presented herein and used for convenience and brevity, and thus, should be interpreted in a flexible manner to include not only the numerical values explicitly recited as the only workable parameters, but also to include all the individual numerical values that can be employed in a studio arrangement 100 to achieve the desired effect discussed herein."
In other words, much ass covering OUTWITH any purported specifics.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: The dumb thing in the setup...
I'll take that as a complement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trying reading the actual claims, and not the description:
"1. A studio arrangement, comprising:
a background comprising a white cyclorama;
a front light source positioned in a longitudinal axis intersecting the background, the longitudinal axis further being substantially perpendicular to a surface of the white cyclorama;
an image capture position located between the background and the front light source in the longitudinal axis, the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens, the at least one image capture device further configured with an ISO setting of about three hundred twenty and an f-stop value of about 5.6;
an elevated platform positioned between the image capture position and the background in the longitudinal axis, the front light source being directed toward a subject on the elevated platform;
a first rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the first rear light source positioned below a top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at an upward angle relative to a floor level;
a second rear light source aimed at the background and positioned between the elevated platform and the background in the longitudinal axis, the second rear light source positioned above the top surface of the elevated platform and oriented at a downward angle relative to the floor level;
a third rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in a lateral axis intersecting the elevated platform and being substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, the third rear light source further positioned adjacent to a side of the elevated platform; and
a fourth rear light source aimed at the background and positioned in the lateral axis adjacent to an opposing side of the elevated platform relative to the third rear light source; wherein
a top surface of the elevated platform reflects light emanating from the background such that the elevated platform appears white and a rear edge of the elevated platform is substantially imperceptible to the image capture device; and
the first rear light source, the second rear light source, the third rear light source, and the fourth rear light source comprise a combined intensity greater than the front light source according to about a 10:3 ratio."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Products
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Amazon Patent Photographs Against a White Background
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: New and Original????????
[ link to this | view in thread ]
USPTO
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Think I'll become a patent troll!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: The dumb thing in the setup...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So how will Amazon prove infringment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Is the Patent Office going wacky?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dumb a_ _ es
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
white background
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That's precisely why. Eliminate patent protection and the small/independent inventor will have no protection from well-funded corporate, government or educational institution 'inventors' who copy the original designs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
re white background
This is OUTFRIGGIN'RAGEOUS! This is like getting a copyright on "Drawing a stick figure" or a copyright on the entire city of NY, etc. Ridiculous and decades too late. What a bunch of bozos at the © office to allow a giant mega-company to copyright a basic technique all of us - even the oldest photographers still working - have been using for decades - practically since studio photography began.
It's crystal clear these mega-companies are trying to control the world and all see big bucks in photography. Since the Gettys and Gates have now bought up most of the world's stock agencies, I suppose greedy corps like Amazon are trying to figure a way to get in on the profitable action. (profitable to the mega wealthy, at least)
I hope like hell the major photographic organizations in America will challenge this ridiculous copyright attack and push for a boycott of Amazon.com.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: "The Amazon Patent"
This is not simply an issue of Amazon "only" copyrighting one specific photographic lighting scenario but the fact anyone would ever be allowed to call a commonly used technique their own unique creation - utter nonsense. It's almost definitely a FACT this exact same setup has been employed by some photographer somewhere.
The big issue here is ? If you can copyright a technique that's been used for over 50 years, uh, what TF is next...
So what if this outrageous copyright applies only to a white cyc with the specifics mentioned above? I've got dozens of portfolio images shot on a white cyc like thousands of professional photographers. Why should any photographer be restricted in any way when it comes to lighting an assignment as one sees fit - period.
An old saying in photography is every photograph has been made previously which is likely fairly accurate. Somewhere, some place somebody has photographed just about everything using an infinite array of lighting techniques, most likely including this exact setup.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I think this is the stupidist patent Idea yet so far
[ link to this | view in thread ]
patent on white background
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "The Amazon Patent"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: re white background
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Patent for photgraphing against a white background
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I take shots of items I make to sell. :) I just bought my first DSLR camera and have been struggling with settings so I can get the best shot. Now I know what to click all those dials to. thanks amazon!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
they patented a GENE which can randomly or through familial genetics be found in any human body on the planet through no fault of the bearer of the gene...
how oh HOW did the patent office let that get thru?
and if i have the gene, am i then in violation of that patent?
and if i am found to have the gene they *own* and suffer some harm, either physically or financially, from the genome they own, can i sue THEM for punitive damages for releasing such a harmful thing on the environment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
and if i am found to have the gene they *own* and suffer some harm, either physically or financially, from the genome they own, can i sue THEM for punitive damages for releasing such a harmful thing on the environment?
No to both. And didn't that patent get invalidated?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
even though his registration indicates that law firm as his employer https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/details.do?regisNum=63007
You can read the communication that led to the issuance here: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
Does anyone here understand that the part of the patent that is enforceable is the claims, which you can read here: http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
The claims are quite a bit more detailed than "photograph against a a white background".
Before you complain, look up the patent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
the claims define the invention, not the picture or some vague generalization of what anyone with a blog says they think the patent means: http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://www.google.com/patents/US8676045
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: "The Amazon Patent"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Dumb a_ _ es
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Amazon's Photographer
According to the owner of www.productphotography.com they are the Amazon's sole-contracted product photography company. Having cornered the market must be nice.
So much for free enterprise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Product photography patent for real?
[ link to this | view in thread ]