Watermarks
Dec 3, 2018 10:31:38 #
I’m not a pro! I’ve always wondered why some photographers put large watermarks on their beautiful photos. Like a name stretching over the photo on the bottom! It draws your attention to the name on the photo and completely distracts from the photo in my opinion. Sometimes looks like an ego thing to me. I understand copy guarding your photos but it can be done much more subtly. Any thoughts and does this annoy anyone else?
Dec 3, 2018 10:36:16 #
Bazbo
Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
markwilliam1 wrote:
I’m not a pro! I’ve always wondered why some photographers put large watermarks on their beautiful photos. Like a name stretching over the photo on the bottom! It draws your attention to the name on the photo and completely distracts from the photo in my opinion. Sometimes looks like an ego thing to me. I understand copy guarding your photos but it can be done much more subtly. Any thoughts and does this annoy anyone else?
I don't do it. My copyright is embedded in the meta data of every photo.
I agree with you. It's distracting. On the other hand, I have no objection to others doing it for whatever reason. If I find the WM distracting, it is very easy to look at something else.
Dec 3, 2018 10:39:11 #
markwilliam1 wrote:
I’m not a pro! I’ve always wondered why some photographers put large watermarks on their beautiful photos. Like a name stretching over the photo on the bottom! It draws your attention to the name on the photo and completely distracts from the photo in my opinion. Sometimes looks like an ego thing to me. I understand copy guarding your photos but it can be done much more subtly. Any thoughts and does this annoy anyone else?
They feel that it safeguards them from someone downloading it and using it for themselves or selling it.
Dec 3, 2018 10:40:03 #
Hell yes it annoys me to.i thought that uhh was supposed to be amateurs and some pros who want to help some of us amateurs get better but it seems like some pros want some free advertising.
Dec 3, 2018 10:41:21 #
trainspotter
Loc: Oregon
Yes.. there are some who post here that use BILLBOARD size watermarks...Yes.... they are a distraction....Yes....to each his own. (my view: smaller is better)
Dec 3, 2018 10:49:26 #
trainspotter wrote:
Yes.. there are some who post here that use BILLBOARD size watermarks...Yes.... they are a distraction....Yes....to each his own. (my view: smaller is better)
After reading these comments all I could think of is what would the paintings done by the Old Masters look like had they plastered their signatures all over their masterpieces?
Dec 3, 2018 10:50:09 #
Dec 3, 2018 11:09:49 #
Hmm, takes a lot longer to copy a painting than to copy a digital photo, meta-data can be removed, personally if someone sees my watermark and would like to see it without there are two sites with my unmarked photos on them, those sites take care of protection from stealing, can somebody, yes but not that easily, here on HedgeHog I post unmarked but reduced size photos, elsewhere I post reduced size marked photos, usually eith a link to the larger protected images. OK it's a form of advertising, I guess.
Dec 3, 2018 11:10:41 #
Just doesn’t make sense to me! Especially the “Ego” driven photographers who plasters their name over their images totally ruining their images. It’s very apparent when I view the gallery photos. Come on people quit ruining your beautiful photographs!
Dec 3, 2018 11:13:09 #
Dec 3, 2018 11:18:32 #
Bazbo
Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
Eddy Vortex wrote:
How do you imbed that data
One of my camera settings allows the camera to imbed it automatically.
Check the owners manual or go on line to learn how to do this for your camera.
Dec 3, 2018 12:12:33 #
Rule 1: If you share digital images in any form, you can expect some will be used, watermark or not. Plan on it.
Rule 2: If you don't like having your images used, limit yourself to prints.
Rule 2: If you don't like having your images used, limit yourself to prints.
Dec 3, 2018 12:23:09 #
markwilliam1 wrote:
I’m not a pro! I’ve always wondered why some photographers put large watermarks on their beautiful photos. Like a name stretching over the photo on the bottom! It draws your attention to the name on the photo and completely distracts from the photo in my opinion. Sometimes looks like an ego thing to me. I understand copy guarding your photos but it can be done much more subtly. Any thoughts and does this annoy anyone else?
You are absolutely right, a too large signature is distracting and "destroys" the image!
Dec 3, 2018 12:54:31 #
markwilliam1 wrote:
I’m not a pro! I’ve always wondered why some photographers put large watermarks on their beautiful photos. Like a name stretching over the photo on the bottom! It draws your attention to the name on the photo and completely distracts from the photo in my opinion. Sometimes looks like an ego thing to me. I understand copy guarding your photos but it can be done much more subtly. Any thoughts and does this annoy anyone else?
You post an image here, Instagram or FB with a watermark and somebody steals it, often as simple as saving to the photo app on their phone. Later they crop out your watermark and use the image in an advertising promotion. The minute you post an image in any form of "recognizable media" you have a defacto copyright per the US Copyright Office. It is hard to argue ignorance of stealing your intellectual property of they took the time to crop out your identifying watermark. And, the penalties for modifying an image without permission of the content creator are greater than simply unauthorized use.
Dec 3, 2018 13:52:09 #
Love this I formative response! Well put.
Thank you,
k a i t o o/daniel
Thank you,
k a i t o o/daniel
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.