To watermark or not to watermark?

Started Nov 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
rodskogj
Junior MemberPosts: 38
Like?
Re: All your image can be downloaded from here
In reply to Clueless Wanderer, Nov 12, 2013

Clueless Wanderer wrote:

rodskogj wrote:

Clueless Wanderer wrote:

rodskogj wrote:

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=site:hangitstraight.com&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=zlSBUtmULMbpiAeT6YC4Cg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1536&bih=772

Just google your site in google images...

HOLY SH*T ...and my day just got a lot worse :-/

Thanks for letting me know..

-- hide signature --

Bottom line is you can't worry excessively about it. End of the day they can get your images if they really want them.

Take reasonable precautions as you have done (i.e. prevent right click). I would probably add a small discrete watermark in bottom corner of images, not a big one. This way they have to make an effort to remove it, but it does not distract from the image itself. The small watermark serve the purpose of 'embedding' copyright info (unlike EXIF which is bypassed with screenshot), and shows knowledge of copyright violation if they photoshop it out.

Much more than that is overkill in my mind, but then again, I'm not the one trying to protect my livelihood...

"I'm not the one trying to protect my livelihood..." - You hit the nail on the head with this one. This is why I need to be tenacious to a point, but not too far

The inability to save images from the website, whist in the website had me feeling safe. However things highlighted by the other posters here has opened my eyes to how images can and are being farmed from the website (google) and left naked for others to save.

I know nothing is fool proof to the determined but I feel I can and need to make some form of effort.

I have added a link to a random image from istock as an example. Do you think a water mark similar to this (not taking up quite as much of the image) strikes a balance of being able to view the image (keeping potential customer's looking) and still having a water mark?

The big difference between my images and istock is that that a customer is looking at istock for an image to fulfil a need, where'as I need people to ponder and be captivated, hoping that it will lead to a sale.. Different head spaces, both needing watermark's. One able to use a bolder water mark than the other?

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-28971910-pasta-tagliatelle.php?st=b3c2380

Not too bad, but I would go even lighter on the watermark if you can. http://elliottneep.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/Wall-Art-Gallery/G0000W73wEot3Y5o/I0000.WOvgEP6NbQ might be too light for you, but it is non-obtrusive for the image. Stock photo watermarks serve the dual purpose of reminding the editor that the image is a low res image for composition only, not final image, and there the watermark needs to be prominent.

Personally I prefer the approach below because it does not take away from the image

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/photo.do?photo=3013&category=54&group=4

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow