Watermarked Photos, whatcha think?

[ScottieMommy]

What do you think of this watermark? I read a thread the other day and seen people online actually steal photos from forums as using them as their own. For xmas i am getting a really good cam and i want to start putting watermarks on my pics. What do you think? Is this good enough? Just a quick sample.




It will say "Leila's Photography"

[Kfamr]

Eh, I'm not a fan of "watermarks" across the whole photo, especially one with such opacity. It takes away from the photos, IMO. While people can still photoshop them out, a lot of professionals just use one of the bottom corners.

[ScottieMommy]

Thanks, and another question i wanted to ask you. What cam do you own? I was thinking on getting one of those. I heard you talking about it the other day. I LOVE the photos it takes. My cam is over 8 years old worn out

[Kfamr]

I currently have two cameras - Canon PowerShot SD1000 and a Canon Rebel XTi. The newest photos I took were with the XTi, but I don't recommend it unless you plan to sell your photography.

[ScottieMommy]

Thanks so much, i like the first you named if pretty good.

[Kalei]

I always wondered about the watermarks too. I like them for the fact that it makes it that much harder for someone to take your photo and say its their's. But I like it better when its down in a corner or something

[dukedogsmom]

I prefer the watermarks and in the center. There's not much need using them if you're going to put them in the corner. You could just put text there. To each his own.

[Falconara]

I agree with Kay - I only put signatures in the lower right hand corner - usually with a copyright symbol...I think putting them in the center kind of kills the picture...

If they want to steal the pics it isnt hard to photoshop the water mark out - its just a matter of playing around...but not too hard to do if you have a steady hand.

aaand on a side note I am getting ready to blow a chunk of my pre-commissioning loan on a canon 40D with an image stabilized lense...oh gosh I am all twitchy about it

[Catlady711]

I currently have two cameras - Canon PowerShot SD1000 and a Canon Rebel XTi. The newest photos I took were with the XTi, but I don't recommend it unless you plan to sell your photography.

I haven't sold my photography in years, but I love my new XTi, the advanced features of my SLR with the benefits of a digital and I can use all my old EF lenses on it, can't beat the combo for the price.

[pitc9]

If you just have something little in a bottom corner, can't that just be cropped out??

[Canis-Lupess]

There are the pros and cons to either way.

Sometimes, a small text in the bottom corner just lets people know that the image is copyright and can be enough to deter some people but not those who specifically set out to take what they know they shouldn't.

Watermarks and transparents text are different in that watermarks will disappear if the image is re-saved or something because it isn't embedded or so Mike Sibley told us in the art forum I go to.
The normal transparent text is different and, in photoshop, you can choose how opaque/transparent you want it to be.

I always stick text straight across the centre of the photos of my paintings but with dog photos and such have just put smaller text in the corner. Neither will stop a determined thief with a knack for photoshop unfortunately.
Some people get around this by disabling the right-click option in their websites. Others only post low res images that won't print very well but other people can still take them and post them in other places online and say they are theirs. Deviant art is full of such thieves, mostly younger kids who don't have a clue about copyright and, even if they do, they still do it because it's the only way to get attention and praise in their life.

I have found a couple of my photos being used by ebay traders to advertise stuff and they did both remove them when I messaged them about it. Not everyone is as cooperative mind. Another artist friend of mine has had her stuff taken and used all over the place and some people basically tell her to get stuffed if she requests they stop using the image and withdraw the product they are using it on.

There is always some risk of something from posting images online no matter what you do with it. Text straight across the image will make it a bit harder and more time-consuming for a thief to take, especially if you put it over an area that will be hardest to remove it from but then you have the issue of it destracting from the image.
With small text, it can be cropped out or much more easily cloned out as it is most likely covering background or foreground that might be out of focus and blurry or part of a larger plain area that is the same like grass.....

Posting low res and at small size means the image can't be fully appreciated. Saving the quality to be as low as possible while retaining a decent size is another option. It won't print very well for starters.

[sandragonfly]

I agree with kay about professional looking but text across the pictures is better because, like canislupess said, harder; time consuming & a lot of hard work for a perfection. especially when they are posted online. I used to do that when I first came back here but it was too much work. every time I see anyone else's or your great pictures kay, I always worry.

this is why all of my pictures threads are always and have been posted in smallest resolutions (no bigger than 300x200 and 400x300 on landscapes) as much as people can see details in it and in all of it, there are hidden texts - you can't see them until I do an effect and point it out if I or anyone caught anyone. but I am really not worried about that, there are a lot more of limitations than for the bottom copyright one, and again, too small to do much with it.

[ScottieMommy]

Thanks everyone for all your help :P

[dukedogsmom]

I guess when it comes down to it, if they want it, they'll get it somehow. Like I said, to each his own. I just prefer the watermark because it is harder to remove.

[Kfamr]

I just really think the "watermark" takes too much away. Honestly, if someone wants to crop/repost my photos and claim it as their own, it's not going to hurt me. *I* know who originally took the photo. If they REALLY wanted to they could even claim to be Kay Knapp, "Leila's Photography", or whoever else and keep the text in the photo. It's actually rather easy to photoshop "watermarks" out and doesn't take too much time.

Besides, it'd be rather hard for them to get money out of a resized photo. To create a quality print you would need the original photo. A photo I resize for the forums (or anywhere I post them) will not make a quality print. Even if a company saw a photo they were claiming, they'd ask for the original. In that case, they wouldn't have the original.

I put my name on the photos for two reasons. 1, to deter others from taking it. 2, to get my name out there. As I'm starting my freelance photography, I'm trying to get my name out there. I've already had one person see pictures I've taken on someone's MySpace (with my permission) and they've contacted me to do a session.