I allow it. But only because I don't know how to not allow it.

I hadn't thought much about it until just now but I have to think that...I'm not sure I like the idea of having too many folks arrive as a result of image searches. I don't believe they're seeking out photography sites, I think they're likely to be looking for an image of something specific (a building, a car, a particular town) and not necessarily with evil intent, hell, they might just want to show someone a building where they used to work...but since they wouldn't be coming to peruse photos, if I could I think I'd be happier without visitors coming via image searches.

Did any of that make sense?

I agree with Em. I've noticed the same in my logs lately, and have been thinking about disallowing it (either via robots.txt or meta tags). It seems like it must mainly result in people copying your images without even looking at the site they came from.

Then there is the copyright issue. If they use your pictures 9 out of 10 times they arent going to give credit as to where they got it. I think if that bothers you, you might want to disallow it. Personally it doesnt bother me if they don't give me credit. I think that comes along with the territory of putting your pictures on the internet. You can ask them to give credit or even remove the picture but its all such a hassle. Ive tried and its not worth it. so let em have it.

I block it, for the same reason - it seems that 99% of such traffic is not from people interested in appreciating my work for what it is, but rather stealing it (for a desktop, for use on their own site, or god knows what). For the same reason I try to block image stealing on my site with an anti-rightclick script (which, yes, I know all too well is imperfect and easily circumvented, but I know of no better option) - my photography isn't merely a hobby to me, it's my life and my livelihood, my sole source of income - and I'm going to protect it. I know I can't stop the image thieves completely, but I don't want to make it any easier for them, either.

(BTW, to block Google from indexing your page - photos and all - use a meta tag: <meta name="robots" content="noarchive, noindex, nofollow, noimageindex, noimageclick">)

I have always blocked google searches from a.lifeuncommon. By accident, I didn't block them on chicagouncommon and it turned out to be very beneficial for me.

A few months ago, I was approached by a parking company here in Chicago who was looking for photographs of buildings they have parking garages in to display in their corporate office. My contact there found me through google and they ended up commissioning me to photograph a few buildings for them.

This has happened to me three times since November of 2002. It's a great way to put yourself out there, but at the same time you have to be willing to accept that some people aren't going to act ethically.

I think even if I felt good enough about my work to want to protect it, I wouldn't block the google search. I'd have to look into it further though to figure out exactly waht it's doing.

There's always the javascript no-image click solution, which can be applied just to the photographs and not the whole site. Which will deter the casual copier (or people to dubm to hit printscreen)

Exposure is a good thing no? That's why I'm on Photoblogs, which generates about 1/2 my meager hits.

I allow it, only for the reason that I'm not looking to profit off of my work. I'm only publishing my art so I can share it with others.

I've been fortunate enough to have a number of individuals ask to use my work. If they're willing to ask before they take, then I'll let them do it.

If I were in a position like Noah, then I'd do everything in my power to stop the stealing.

Mark, I think you have a great eye for composition and have a great sense of the moment.
I enjoy your site very much it is very inspirational.
I live in Toronto and enjoy looking at life through the lense myself, specially BW. What camera do you use and why?