Personalised Bank Cards

Loopy

I applied for a personalised bank card with a picture of myself and 2 daughters on it.

They rejected it saying:

The image you submitted for your personalised Permanent tsb ATM/Laser account ATM Card has not met our image screening criteria. It was denied because it did not pass the following rule: Nudity or semi nudity. Any images containing images of children in a state of undress will be rejected.

Our shoulders were on display. We were topless in the photo and had bottoms on but the only thing you could see was the top of my daughters chests (no nipples) and they rejected it, I mean an inch below their necks or so.

I cannot believe this. Have things become this bad in our society that images
of young children with an a small portion of their bodies exposed whilst sitting on their mothers knee is considered in some way disturbing

Maybe its me, but I am flabbergasted at this??

ntlbell

i'm flabergatsed you want a personalised bank card.

AlmightyCushion

I'd say they would use a software that would scan a photo and analyse it for things like nudity and copyrighted images. If that's the case the software would most likely be quite strict so that nothing can slip through.

Loopy

ntlbell wrote: »

i'm flabergatsed you want a personalised bank card.

That's exactly what the OH said, oh and you spelt flabbergasted wrong:D

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I'd say they would use a software that would scan a photo and analyse it for things like nudity and copyrighted images. If that's the case the software would most likely be quite strict so that nothing can slip through.

Ok but who deems shoulders inappropriate?? Because that's all that was on display...

snellers

there has been loads of chat about the personalised cards around forums everywhere....the main issue has been their advert - based on the t&c's they stipulate with regards to the image the actual one they advertise would be rejected!! (the three guys no shirts on)

it is a joke - it is just another way to cream a few quid off of their clients imo

AlmightyCushion

Do they charge for it?

ntlbell

snellers wrote: »

it is a joke - it is just another way to cream a few quid off of their clients imo

it's free?

Loopy

snellers wrote: »

the main issue has been their advert - based on the t&c's they stipulate with regards to the image the actual one they advertise would be rejected!! (the three guys no shirts on)

it is a joke - it is just another way to cream a few quid off of their clients imo

Yes I noticed that, false advertising..

Its not free its €10.

Mint Sauce

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Do they charge for it?

ntlbell wrote: »

it's free?

a standard card is free, the personalised card isn't

Hotblack Desiato

If you really want that pic, try submitting it in black and white.

Loopy

Yes I do, its a really nice one of the 3 of us. What difference would it make in black and white though - you will still see their 'shoulders'

AlmightyCushion

irish-stew wrote: »

a standard card is free, the personalised card isn't

Why would someone pay for a personalised card. What a waste of money.

Loopy

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Why would someone pay for a personalised card. What a waste of money.

Whatever floats your boat I guess, its just something I would be into;)

Nevyn

looptheloop wrote: »

Yes I do, its a really nice one of the 3 of us. What difference would it make in black and white though - you will still see their 'shoulders'

Cos often the software used to check suitability does so based on the ammount of pink tones or flesh colored pixels in the picture and it being in black and white gets around that.

Deliverance

Thaedydal wrote: »

Cos often the software used to check suitability does so based on the ammount of pink tones or flesh colored pixels in the picture and it being in black and white gets around that.

So a picture of a pig would not be allowed then?;) The pics must go through some kind of screening (human) process besides the software?

As a sidenote: could the novlety idea of a picture on the card be used in a more practical way to prevent theft, i.e. the genuine user of the credit card having a picture on the actual card of themselves for the shop keeper to see and therefore determine that the user is the person portrayed on the card? Would that be more immediately more secure than the chip and pin, or even add to it?

Hotblack Desiato

Thaedydal wrote: »

Cos often the software used to check suitability does so based on the ammount of pink tones

That software is RACIST!!!!!11!!!1!

Loopy

Thaedydal wrote: »

Cos often the software used to check suitability does so based on the ammount of pink tones or flesh colored pixels in the picture and it being in black and white gets around that.

I'll try it and see, they will probably come back with 'there's a snot on one of the kids nose's so the image is unsatisfactory':D

snellers

I could be wrong here but I would have thought an automated 'skin tone checker' would only be step 1 in the approval process - are you suggesting that you could literally send anything in black and white and it would be approved? ......I wouldn;t have thought so

would be interested if anyone has had things approved this way

**thinking about its uses I guess by having your picture on the front could act as a deterrent to a thief to use it......unless they look a lot like the picture :-)

missmatty

looptheloop wrote: »

We were topless in the photo

I think I've cracked the reason.....

(sorry couldn't resist)

Deliverance

missmatty wrote: »

I think I've cracked the reason.....

(sorry couldn't resist)

Oh for F's sake. That is the reason so. What a misleading question by the OP, this shouldn't be in the parenting forum it should be in a nudist forum. Still brought up a few larfs though. Very obsevant there mismatty.

NextSteps

Deliverance wrote: »

As a sidenote: could the novlety idea of a picture on the card be used in a more practical way to prevent theft, i.e. the genuine user of the credit card having a picture on the actual card of themselves for the shop keeper to see and therefore determine that the user is the person portrayed on the card? Would that be more immediately more secure than the chip and pin, or even add to it?

You'd have to be holding a big sign saying 'THIS IS ME!'

Loopy

They rejected the black and white photo as well :mad:

Sabre0001

Have heard that it is incredibly hard to actually get a photo approved...So many terms and conditions attached.

Though you may need a photo where the kids are visibly clothed.

Loopy

Sabre0001 wrote: »

Have heard that it is incredibly hard to actually get a photo approved...So many terms and conditions attached.

Though you may need a photo where the kids are visibly clothed.

I'm going to submit one where they have hats and scarfs on and see how I get on;)

Ickle Magoo

irish-stew wrote: »

a standard card is free, the personalised card isn't

It used to be...when they first introduced the personalised cards they didn't cost a bean to change standard cards to personalised ones. You had to get it done by a certain date tho. :rolleyes:

Deliverance

looptheloop wrote: »

I'm going to submit one where they have hats and scarfs on and see how I get on;)

Ah well that should do it, interesting thread all the same. They must have some kind of legal responsibility over the content of the photos at the end of the day, bet they are sorry they started it now. Unless the screening process costs less than the revenue made from the ones that make it through.

Still think the scheme has some security uses though. It would make it harder for crims to use a card with a pic of the user on it.

Athough this would probably mean that every card would have to have one which would mean expense. And it would be a hard pitch to tell the customer that their card would be more secure with a pic of the user, as this could imply that current card security is not good enough.