I am confused. If the metaframe proves the originals are his, why the need to publicly embarrassed a person who shares the same profession as you? Did he knocked you around and you are bitter – your post in your site is nothing more than a woman’s scorn and personal? Ever heard or experience: what comes around goes around? FYI there were some other budding pjs who tried the same stunt earlier on him and the media, PR and agencies along with a few notable professional spun the story against them. Don’t play with fire. You are young and new in this area.
that sucks Thao! at least you found out before it was too late!
Incorrect. The metadata proves that he has the picture, sure. But it doesn’t prove that it is his. If someone put an image online, then anyone can pull it off and input their info in it.
I asked for a caption sheet so that I could see the whole take. Because even if you have one image, the original owner would have all the other images also taken from that day.
I know him as of a total of two weeks and we were business partners. I felt like I was given a false representation of what would have been 50% of my photography business. I am merely doing this as a warning to others to be cautious and well informed in their dealings with him. They can chose to go with or without him, that’s their decision not mine to make for them.
Everything I have posted is neither slanderous or libelous, it is presented as a documentation of what went on. If you see something that falls into that category of slander/libel I would gladly look into it.
If the news and media got involved, could you please refer me to the documentation as they would be beneficial to others visiting the page.
I noticed that originally the first Flikr forums started about 6 months ago. In this day and age, everything is search able and posted online. So I’m interested to see where these article might be, so if you by chance have the links to them, I would gladly post them online with the other evidence.
I may be new to the commercial side of photography but I’ve been shooting editorial photography for 5 years.
caption sheet was suppose to be contact sheet like I mentioned in the email.
contact sheet= “An 8 inches x 10 inches photo made by laying an entire roll of 35-mm film negatives directly upon the photo paper and exposing it to light. Photographers use contact sheets to reveal what is contained on a roll of film before deciding which exposures they will go through the trouble of printing.”
So basically thumbnails of a shoot.
Yeah, a large amount of what he claims is his is definitely stolen. He posts several stolen images on his blog, stating they are his. For example
The cloud photographs were clearly shot several years ago by some sort of storm chaser group, not by Nauman Saghir in August 2008. In fact, the large images they host on their site all have proper metadata.
He steals a lot from
http://www.flickr.com/photos/maciejdakowicz/ (on one of his many online ‘cvs’ he had this photographers tear sheets listed as his own)
Apparently he shot these for real
His Lens.Antics flickr account is now gone, but I did take several screen grabs of the offending material if you are interested.
sure, send me any additional materials to firstname.lastname@example.org .
also thanks for contributing to the site.
Maybe next link is useful for you:
Hello,we caught Nauman Saghir again,this time stealing a Brett Walker photo.Brett was informed and Nauman shut down as soon as contacted.
His blog is now also gone along with his CarbonMade site….Success,he keeps getting caught and closing down his sites.I have screen Grabs also.What a loser…
This jerk lives in Nashville now at 316 Timberdale Ct. Nashville, TN 37211. 615-891-9030. He wrote a bad check for photographic equipment at a local mom & pop photo shop for $655 and disappeared!