watermark photos or not: I am currently trying to decide whether to start adding a watermark to my photos or simple signing them personally the ones that are either sold or given away.

out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

I am currently trying to decide whether to start adding a watermark to my photos or simple signing them personally the ones that are either sold or given away. Currrently i have been in two different galleries as an upcoming amatuer photographer and just aquired a full wall at a third gallery and four spots in the next years state fair. I have sold several landscape photos at these galleries and currently have been personnal signing each photo with either a gold or silver paint marker pen. To me this just makes the photo seem more personal for the buyer however they have to wait sometimes a week or two for me to sign the photo since my actual job takes me out of town each week. Looking for everyones opionon or other ideas if they have any?

fotobyferg

Signing is great if you have that personal connection.
I take a lot of team photographs for my adult son’s sports, and like to add a discreet watermark.
I don’t sell my images. My greatest “reward” is seeing my photos used and enjoyed as Facebook profile or cover images by the players, as well as their personal thank yous. The teams also use all my images on their websites.
Makes me smile.

Silverrails

out4life2016 wrote:

I am currently trying to decide whether to start a... (show quote)

I look forward to enjoying a viewing some of your Landscape Photography here at UHH.
I really cannot offer any professional advice on your above inquiry concerning the "Signing" of your beautiful Landscape photos, since I am only an "Advanced Amatur" and have no specific knowledge concerning this subject.

out4life2016 Loc: Bellingham, Washington

Silverrails wrote:

I look forward to enjoying a viewing some of your Landscape Photography here at UHH.
I really cannot offer any professional advice on your above inquiry concerning the "Signing" of your beautiful Landscape photos, since I am only an "Advanced Amatur" and have no specific knowledge concerning this subject.

Thank You for your reply i will have to say i am no where near professional status but i do enjoy the looks on ppeoples faces when they see a photo of mine that they truely enjoy and want to hang in their home..

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

I sign both the border of the print as well as the matte. The border is signed using black ink that won't interact with the photograph. The matte is signed with a pencil, soft lead and a light touch.
--Bob

out4life2016 wrote:

I am currently trying to decide whether to start a... (show quote)

philo Loc: philo, ca

why not sign all of the images that are up for sale?

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I watermark images that will be posted to the internet. Prints that I have for sale I hand sign. Years ago I used a printer who had me send him my signature. Then he would add it to my images when he printed them. That worked pretty well also.

Bullfrog Bill Loc: CT

Sign it. I print with a 3 point black border around the print and Leave a 3/8 border inside the mat that shows off the high quality paper and allows room for a signature. Use artist pencil on mat paper and sharpie on hard surface paper.

CaptainBobBrown

I personally find the watermarks people put on photos distracting from the beauty of the photo...if it's a really good one. It's the ego of the photographer standing out rather than the photo. I'm sure that if someone finds a photo worth keeping, mounting, showing on a wall and paying for to boot they might like to have the personal signature of the photographer somewhere inobtrusive on the photo on the back side. Otherwise as in galleries they can post a discrete notice below the photo indicating relevant info including photographer's name, circumstances of the photo, etc.

chemsaf Loc: San Diego

I give my customer the choice. If I sell the file I include the copyright in the Metadata

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

A watermark isn't a signature. It's like getting a rubber stamp autograph of a star. While I might treasure a real autograph, I'd be annoyed by a stamp or a watermark. In reality, it would be up to your customers what they would prefer: a fast watermark or a slow autograph.

Photographer Jim Loc: Rio Vista, CA

When asked about digital signatures, a gallery owner I worked with replied, “We sell art here, not posters”.

Most people who are buying original artwork, expect authentic artist signatures. Sign your work proudly.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

jerryc41 wrote:

A watermark isn't a signature. It's like getting a rubber stamp autograph of a star. While I might treasure a real autograph, I'd be annoyed by a stamp or a watermark. In reality, it would be up to your customers what they would prefer: a fast watermark or a slow autograph.

Wouldn't be if the watermark was one's signature? (Or semblance thereof.)

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

I find watermarks distracting and certainly wouldn't want them on a print I buy.
Only use archival pigment pens for signing. Others will bleed through or even off-gas over time and damage your print.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

It depends on the photo. For personal use, I use small white computer generated text to identify name, date, location taken. Nothing worse than having a bunch of prints with no information on who it is etc. I have photos that are over 100 years old from my family. They are relatives I do not know or recognize but presume they are related because they came from my Grandparents. This also helps with genealogy. But, these are NOT fine art. I would consider them snapshots.