suuperslow

Is there a better type of watermark to use? Wasnt sure if one was harder to remove than another. This is what I use now and I like the look of it, just want it to be functional.

oople

Im not a fan of the across the centre of the image style, I think unless you are super-pro and already making a good living off it you aren't going to impress people by hampering their viewing pleasure.
I have people occasionally nick photos and use them on websites, which im not overly happy about, but anyone who ever would pay or in some way compensate me, does. I would never charge someone to use an image for non-profit reasons, if they ask and I approve of it. Having said that, if they dont ask, they can pay.


Yours is a bit hard to see but if thats what you are going for, cool. Not sure thats quite how you spell photo though

I did use my oO logo but now use my website name since so many of my photos get linked around no link to my site. So people at least have a way to find me.

suuperslow

Thanks for the info there, I wanted phototivity but the url was taken by someone. So i went with a more creative was of spelling it.

W.E.D.Jim

iTrader: (17)

This one needs revival, anyone who visits the Grid forums knows this is a hotter topic elsewhere!


Imo, a water mark can serve two purposes. The one is for protection of a photo someone hopes to sell and to protect the photgrapher from having it used without permission(and suitable payment).
This is when the watermark goes across the entire photo making it unusable without serious editing. Anyone capable of editing that much can likely take a similar pic themselves is the theory.


The other reason is just to identify who took the picture for exposure for the amatuer and to try and get to a place where they may get money from pics some day.

This is the one done as you have it marked.

Both serve a purpose.

orgnoi1

iTrader: (39)

I realize this is a VERY old post... but it also really needs discussing... I dont generally watermark over the image... but in light of things that have happened with social sites and such I may just start... its NOT about being a super pro... its about copyright and ownership of images and the fact that just about anyone who owns a computer feels its ok to take an image at will and use it for whatever they choose...

Ziggy007

That's my watermark....I learned quick after starting my site that disabling right click doesn't work! You just get a bunch of e-mails from people wanting a high res for wallpaper! I just reduce the image size enough to keep from being able to print.

One major thing I've learned is adding metadata to your photos when you upload them to the internet. I use adobe bridge, and apply this when I copy pics from my memory cards (when i remember)

This helps with people copying and pasting your image to other sites, even if they cut your water mark off, the data is still stored with the image so search engines can find it, so it's kinda like free advertisement for your website (if its included in your metadata....)

KenzieDelatorre

metadata is also a great way to prove it's your photo if it is stolen.

Stregone

I don't watermark my images. I usually upload at 1024 res max. IMO its pretty pretentious to watermark images as a hobbyist photographer Kind of like those people who buy a canon rebel or a nikon d40 and get the idea that they are now a pro, and open up a photography business.

Who cares if someone wants your images on their desktop wallpaper? Its one more person appreciating something you made. So long as someone isn't using your image to make themselves money, it isn't worth it.

Armistice

Haha, exactly! Anyone who buys some decent SLR will put their watermark on their photos like they need to protect something

I only watermark my race photos, but it's actually a job and get paid for the photos, so it's ok, lol

OffroadRebel

That's really depend the reason why you watermark your photos.
In my case I watermark my photos just with my personal website.
That way people can go and see more or if the photo is good enough to bring a potential customer attention like RC car magazine or Companies they will know were they can find me so is more for promo than anything else. In a lot of the occasions also owners of the cars want to buy their photos so with the watermark they now how to contact me.


For stealing I really do not care to much I follow a simple rule. If you do not want that somebody steal one of your photos is very easy do not post it over the internet. Meaning in a case of a Paid job I do not post any of the photos that my client select for themselves. I post the other ones that do not feed my client necessities and if a person or company steal one of my photos and used for comercial publicity well I always can prove that the photo is mine.
Two tricks
1. Do not upload the photos with the metadata that is a big mistake. You keep your photo with your metadata and all the exif information of it. That way the person who stole
can not prove even with what camera or settings the photo was took.
2. Shoot RAW, NEF or any other Genuine format It consume more memory space but there only can be one RAW file and in court is the only way to prove that the was took with your camera.

So watermarking or not it's more depend on your goal but I can tell if anybody is watermarking their photos just to avoid that somebody steal it is really not worth it. There is always a way to remove the watermarks.

JoshT

iTrader: (6)

Totally agree,
I dont see an issue with a non intrusive watermark that has a website of the photographer or their flickr account for example, it gets the photographer more exposure/potential clients and people can see more photos from an event etc.

Dadaman

iTrader: (20)

Can't metadata be easily removed these days?

Dadaman

iTrader: (20)

This is the watermark that I designed in Photoshop for my daughter. Nothing to fancy. I just add this into her photos before she publishes them on any forums.