lreisner Loc: Union,NJ

It doesn't take much knowledge to remove watermarks in almost any editor these days. There was a time when posting very low resolution pictures might have made a difference but now with Giggapixal and other similar programs doing such a great job, that might not help either.

tinwhistle

I don't spend a lot of time on this forum, or any other, too busy taking pictures. Also, I did not read all 5 pages of comments, but I would like to add my opinion on this topic. I do not make a living on photography, but I make enough to cover expenses and support my "gear head" persona and I never post images on line. In fact, I rarely post an image here on UHH. Good, bad, or indifferent they are my images and I'm selfish. The thing is, where is that "lifted" image going and what is it going to represent when it's gone? I like to have control over what is mine. Thanks for letting me vent...

KindaSpikey Loc: English living in San Diego

Yeah, while I agree with your point, I think you'd be surprised how few people actually know of what software to use, and also how to use it, especially the "image thieves" you're likely to find on Facebook et al. The suggestion is obviously not foolproof, (nothing is going to be perfect), but if it only stopped 50%, that's still an improvement over doing nothing, and it's quick to implement and costs nothing.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

About half of what separates a successful photographer from their peers is an ability to remove the watermark.

But, I agree, a watermark is more than likely to encourage most image thieves to move onto the next un-marked image.

lreisner Loc: Union,NJ

Fair point.

KindaSpikey Loc: English living in San Diego

You're absolutely right Paul, (as usual) lol, the watermark thing wasn't really targeting professional photographers though, I'd be surprised if any of them didn't know how to get rid of it, and hopefully, (maybe a little naively), they are not the people "stealing" images, but rather the scumbags hanging out on places like Facebook etc. But like I said, the only 100% protection is to not post anything you value in the first place. Hope you have a great day!

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Perhaps be really brilliant and drop Facebook completely.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...I think watermarks are ugly and detract from the image so have graduated to not using them at all. One exception is my Smugmug site where a large PROOF is applied over the content. Like I said before, I don't really have time to chase around after thieves...*this* time was lucky and I contacted the right person but all-in-all it's a big time <shrug>...

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Is a watermark in the lower corner of an image posted to FB really that distracting?

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...they are ALL distracting. Not a fan anymore and that's my decision. YMDV...I even sign my wall art on the back.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Oh well, I don't understand why you care who takes them from FB then .... Seemingly, your priorities are different from mine, especially if "all" can't be adjusted to be instead "most" via opacity and size / font.

chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA

...you haven't read all my responses, Paul. I really *don't* care, but if I discover one or more of my images being used commercially I'll certainly investigate and try to get renumeration. In this case it worked out. Even my old watermarks are easily erased as even at the start I didn't like the distraction. <shrug>

cactuspic Loc: Dallas, TX

Paul, I suppose its a matter of taste and how we individually perceive the image. Personally my eyes tend to be more in agreement with chasgroh and typically watermarks bother me; although I have seen a few where the watermark is so innocuous that it doesn't bother me. This is just a matter of personal point of view. I respect and accept your perceptions, though watermarks tend to spoil the work for me.

But their is another consideration. I don't know if you have seen recent cell phone commercials for Samsung phones stressing the ability to remove distracting parts of the image easily. The days that you had to be a Photoshop maven to successfully remove a part of an image are fast fading. Computational photography and AI are changing the game with surprising phone technology. Watching the facility that some of my younger family members manipulate images on their phones is eyeopening. Distracting elements are eliminated and photo recropped with ease. Even small image size may not be a defense. Unlike my world of a large computer screen, theirs is the world of the small screen. Any low pixel image that will look good enough to view on our monitors has more than enough resolution to view on their small screens. It's a changing world.

Irwin

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Just like 'PhotoShop' really means fundamentally different things inside the minds of different people, I'm quite certain 'watermark' is similarly entirely different inside the minds of different people. For the most part, I don't even see the watermarks on my own images, at a 30% opacity in the lower right corner. Every so often on a dark image, it may be more apparent, but more like 98% of images, they are 'seen' only if one is inspecting the bottom right corner, far far away from the specific subject and selective focus of the composition. For any of my posts, you can tell me different, and that I'm not seeing what others see.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

Does displaying LOW files deter theft?