Is it worth watermarking?

Haaaaaaaaaahahahaha! Good game!

myky-d-image.jpg
 
Cos he puts "photography" on the waternarks!

How many of you do your own wallpapering and then call yourselves Painters & Decorators?
 
tigerimages said:
Are you a professional photographer Markk?
Click to expand...

To truthfully answer your question, I would not consider myself professional.

I aspire to take the best photographs I can and showcase them in my Flickr (link in my sig. Excluding the obvious family album stuff). Do I expect to be paid one day for this? Probably not. But I would gladly welcome it if someone offered.

I do hope that in the future I will have some kind of 'place', not necessarily a dedicated studio à la Chase Jarvis, but somewhere that I could do some "weekend warrior stuff". But I do however try to bring my photos as close as possible to a 'professional standard', whatever that may be, and to the best of my abilities.

What's your definition of a professional in that case? When would one be able to use 'XYZ Photography'? Is it based on time allocated during a day to photography or the income you make off of it? The popularity of your photos or positive criticism from other "professionals"?
 
Myky D said:
Haaaaaaaaaahahahaha! Good game!
Click to expand...

Dammit! It's supposed to be a snap! That picture was half decent! ;)

Borats Baby said:
He looks like one to me !
Click to expand...

Yes! Thank You! ;)

Maybe this is that 'positive criticism' from other professionals I was writing about in the previous post. Sort like a self governed body of professionals.

But in all seriousness, a person ultimately can choose whatever they want irregardless of the message it conveys. Poor pictures with watermarks will ultimately convey amateur at best, but if that person chooses to place such a watermark, then by all means.

Personally I put watermarks occasionally because it's more a 'mood' thing. When I'm in the mood and I think I'd like people to at least see my name on a photo, then I put it on. Maybe in the future I'll be able to use it more in the intended purpose that have in mind
 
tigerimages said:
Cos he puts "photography" on the waternarks!

How many of you do your own wallpapering and then call yourselves Painters & Decorators?
Click to expand...

Erm ... I do.

What is this ruling that one must be professional to watermark?

I don't want my photos nicked - hence the watermark. Do you not secure your car because you're not a professional racing driver?
 
Myky D said:
Erm ... I do.

What is this ruling that one must be professional to watermark?

I don't want my photos nicked - hence the watermark. Do you not secure your car because you're not a professional racing driver?
Click to expand...

Same here BUT if you have a watermark right at the corner or bottom of an image people can easily crop them and cut out the watermark, you should center your watermarks and make them fainter slightly :) That way no one can crop it :D
 
xSitara™;1419844 said:
Same here BUT if you have a watermark right at the corner or bottom of an image people can easily crop them and cut out the watermark, you should center your watermarks and make them fainter slightly :) That way no one can crop it :D
Click to expand...

Well I try to put them in a position where if they're cut out or cropped it will ruin the image.
 
Myky D said:
Well I try to put them in a position where if they're cut out or cropped it will ruin the image.
Click to expand...

It wont if you make them really faint that way you can still see the image, I personally think if you're going to have a watermark right at the edge of a photo it might aswell not be there because people can crop the area that's not covered in a watermark. For instance I did this...

29o4d5i.jpg

because if someone decides to put my face on some weird networking site and pretend it's them or their cousin or aunt they wont be able to because my watermark is over my face yet it can be seen clearly.

I hope you understand what i'm trying to get at here :)
 
In regard to the theft question

Yes it is theft, it is what is known as intellectual property theft
 
tigerimages said:
Cos he puts "photography" on the waternarks!

How many of you do your own wallpapering and then call yourselves Painters & Decorators?
Click to expand...

I went out today and took some photographs down at the local boat yard.

What I was doing, the act which I was performing, was photography.

Therefore, today, I must have been a photographer . (y)
 
Why are you guys debating over who's a photographer who isn't? The main point here is that everyone has a right to watermark their work because it's their work and they own it, it prevents theft.

To the OP watermarking your work is a fab idea, it doesn't matter which level you're at or what kinda work it is. Go for it :D
 
Last edited:
xSitara™;1419886 said:
Why are you guys debating over who's a photographer who isn't? The main point here is that everyone has a right to watermark their work because it's their work and they own it, it prevents theft.

To the OP watermarking your work is a fab idea, it doesn't matter which level your at, what kinda work it is. Go for it :D
Click to expand...

quite right,

Good call !!!!!

(y)
 
Syx said:
So how is printing money that is "data in a pc" any different from printing your photograph? They are still the same basic crime. If software is just "data in a pc" then how come you buy it in a store, and obtaining it without paying is classed as theft?

I'm actually trying to determine whether you really believe this or are just pulling our legs. :shrug: :wacky:
Click to expand...


I agree.

Effectively the publishers of Tigers image HAVE printed money.

They have printed a photo that they have no copyright or permission to and then gain financially from it. That is against the law.

It is the same as me copying an audio CD and then selling copies to people.

I do pop a little water mark in the bottom corner of photo's not because i want to protect against theft as i'm not that good to get published. But its just an identifier that i took the photo, i also put the year on it so i can hopefully see an improvement over the years i take photo's.
 
:agree: ... and it's also good photoshop practise ;)
 
tigerimages said:
waternarks!
Click to expand...

My favourite new word (y)

Seriously though - if you want to watermark you photo's do it. If you don't don't. No skin off my nose!

As for 'if you can't hold it, it's not theft' argument - complete drivel. :wacky:
 
lol, this thread is turning into the forum equivalent of the perfect storm. It starts off with the gentle breeze about watermarking and before you know it's kicked up to gale force with the classics debates of ‘is it image theft' and 'daring to call yourself a photographer if you are not a professional'. All we need now is for someone to chip in with some HDR bashing and a bit of 'what am the best camera system' and we'll get into a cyclone of the perfect circular argument ;)
 
Last edited:
Hawker said:
All we need now is for someone to chip in with some HDR bashing and a bit of 'what am the best camera system' and we'll get into a cyclone of the perfect circular argument ;)
Click to expand...

and maybe a peppering of Canon VS Nikon and 'Should I do Weddings?' to put the cherry on! :D
 
Myky D said:
Use a crude drawing of a big cock as a watermark. It will give across a succinct message to those you wish to deter.
Click to expand...

Farmers? :shrug:

Myky D said:
It's like claiming rock music is better than jazz or something
Click to expand...

Jazz IS better. You should know that! :LOL:

neilmac said:
And YOU paid £2 to see the copy of your own photo?
Click to expand...

Puts his POV into context me thinks... :D

Lasagne said:
You should do what I do - just take really crap photos - problem solved ;)
Click to expand...

Haha... I try to, and some would no doubt say I succeed! :LOL:

xSitara™;1419942 said:
Lol... the thoughts went a bit overboard.
Click to expand...

Didn't they just? What does it matter how anyone chooses to mark their images? It matters not one jot what level of profficiency they are - it's their right to attempt to prevent misuse of their image in any way they see fit.

I personally have 2 watermarks on all of my work now, a clear and bold website link in the corner, and the name of my website (excluding the www & .com) in the centre in a big but transparent font. If you don't like it don't look.

Does it prevent my photo's being used elsewhere? Of course it does, and good job too. I need to eat and pay bills with more than the kudos a printed/published stolen/misused image provides! (delete as per your opinion on copyright theft ;))
 
Last edited:
I didn't say there was anything wrong with adding watermarks to your photographs, I just think it's wrong when you see crap images with professional looking watermarks on them saying XYZ Photography which suggests to me as if it's done by a pro.

The OP says his pictures are amatuerish at best so theres a very good chance we'll end up seeing an example just as I've described because he's been convinced by the hordes on here that it's the right thing to do.
 
tigerimages said:
I didn't say there was anything wrong with adding watermarks to your photographs, I just think it's wrong when you see crap images with professional looking watermarks on them saying XYZ Photography which suggests to me as if it's done by a pro.

The OP says his pictures are amatuerish at best so theres a very good chance we'll end up seeing an example just as I've described because he's been convinced by the hordes on here that it's the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

I think the government should make it illegal to put a professional looking watermark on an amateur image.
 
ah, but what if it was it was taken by a professional in the artistic sytle of an amateur? then what ;)
 
Feel free,

Watermark away. People are very adept at cloning topday anyways, and unless you stamp it right across the image it's not gonna have much effect anyway.

Finally. An 800 px image at 72 dpi isn't worth squat, even with interpolation!

Apologies to the owner of the image but.......


2 minutes in CS4. Had I spent an hour doing pixel perfect sampling it would be immaculate.......

theft1.jpg




100% crop of an up-rezzed copy of the original file. I used Genuine Fractals Print Pro for this, widely recognised as being the best upsampling algorithms around and up rezzed to 240 dpi 16x20 inch. A good healthy print size.

There isn't a professional print company/Image library/Magazine etc that would touch an image with this quality!

theft2.jpg




Ok, so people can nick your images and use them elsewhare on the web. Big deal. If you watermark your image there are 100,000's out there who don't and they'll just use on of those rather than pay you for a version without a watermark.

Granted, if I was shooting weddings or something where I was the only shooter the I would watermark the images on the page people can order them from as some goon is always going to try and rip them off to print a couple of 6x4's for the aunts but for general stuff.........

Don't post images bigger than 800px and don't worry about it too much!
 
imo if you are going to put photos on the net you have to expect people to nick/use /borrow them as its sooo easy to do .. you could watermark the but if someone wants it that bad i am sure there is always a way..

one of my fav/ best shots imho as never seen the internet and prob never will


but it looks fantastic 20"x 30" cavass on a wall

share watermark . dont watermark choice is yours(y)


md;)


also what gandi says
 
Last edited:
What a hilarious read that was. Tigerimages you have upset alot of people haven't you :LOL:
Unfortunatly you also made yourself out to be an ignorant git that thinks your better than everyone else.
We all use this forum to show our photos and to talk to like minded people about photography, to turn round and suggest that someone shouldn't watermark there images because there crap/amateurish is just plain childish and snobbish.

If someone wants to protect there work be it crap, amateurish or proffessional then go for it because its theres and its personal.

After having a chat to my freind who is a copper he has stated that it is an actual theft if it is taken/used without permission.
 
I usually do ;)

Why am I ignorant for suggesting that there should be standards? I'm not a pro and don't pretend to be so I don't watermark my images as such. I said to the photo thief who stole my photo last night that I didn't mind him using it because at the level our clubs are at most of the bread and butter stuff is done by volunteers for the love of it and often in the face of adversity and I see us all as friends.

Believe it or not I have a pretty decent name around our league and most seem to appreciate what I do and the fact that I share things. As I've said, I'm no pro and I don't describe what I do as "work". I do apologise if I'm not pretencious enough for the rest of this forum.

And your copper friend? LOL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top