Copyright & Watermarks

hayley.price

hayley.price

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,796
Name
hayley
Edit My Images
Yes
hey was wondering if i could get a bit of advice

i copyright my pictures like this one,

seagull by Aralia photos, on Flickr

I have been told that i should put a better watermark over them to stop people stealing them and that i should have it more over the main picture so it can't be cropped out, now i think my copyright i currently have ruins the picture so putting one over the main picture it self in my eyes would ruin it even more but whats your thoughts on doing this? and would you recommend doing it?
 
You can always place it in the centre of the image but lower the opacity of it so it can still be seen but doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.
 
In my experience, whatever you do with a watermark someone will find a way to remove it, if they want to. The only way to prevent pictures being "stolen" is not to put them on the internet in the first place .... but that kinda defeats the object, I guess :)
 
i do some thing similar to this but i lower the opacity
 
fantastic shot BTW hayley, nice composition,sharp and really shows the definition in the birds wings
 
I do this http://iwantpics.co.uk/Staightliners world records 2013.html and they still turn up in droves on social network sites.I have to have a couple hours every 3mnths or so searching to get them removed.

If you do not want other people to have your photos don't put them on the internet.
If you do, make your mind up as to why you are putting them out there on the net: to sell- Then copyright them all over so they are just about ruined. To let people see your work then don't copyright them at all who cares who took the photo as long as it is pleasing the viewer. Unless of course there is more to the watermarking than protecting the copyright of course:whistling:
 
stupar said:
You can always place it in the centre of the image but lower the opacity of it so it can still be seen but doesn't stick out like a sore thumb.
Click to expand...

thats what they were saying to me but would that not ruin it even more

Bristolian said:
In my experience, whatever you do with a watermark someone will find a way to remove it, if they want to. The only way to prevent pictures being "stolen" is not to put them on the internet in the first place .... but that kinda defeats the object, I guess :)
Click to expand...

yes have always put them on the internet for people too see.

alix said:
i do some thing similar to this but i lower the opacity
Click to expand...

hmm okay

Brendan Mulachy said:
fantastic shot BTW hayley, nice composition,sharp and really shows the definition in the birds wings
Click to expand...

thank you

kestral said:
I do this http://iwantpics.co.uk/Staightliners world records 2013.html and they still turn up in droves on social network sites.I have to have a couple hours every 3mnths or so searching to get them removed.

If you do not want other people to have your photos don't put them on the internet.
If you do, make your mind up as to why you are putting them out there on the net: to sell- Then copyright them all over so they are just about ruined. To let people see your work then don't copyright them at all who cares who took the photo as long as it is pleasing the viewer. Unless of course there is more to the watermarking than protecting the copyright of course:whistling:
Click to expand...

i do sell them occasionally but they only really go on facebook or flickr, if people ask for them i sell them but they are not particularly up online for sale.

i put the watermark there just so people looking at them know who took it haha
 
hayley.price said:
thats what they were saying to me but would that not ruin it even more
Click to expand...

Not really. There are ways of blending your logo into the image so that it takes on the same tonal range (think embossed).
So you can see it bit its not as obvious as a black logo or faded black logo.
 
hayley.price said:
thats what they were saying to me but would that not ruin it even more



yes have always put them on the internet for people too see.



hmm okay



thank you



i do sell them occasionally but they only really go on facebook or flickr, if people ask for them i sell them but they are not particularly up online for sale.

i put the watermark there just so people looking at them know who took it haha
Click to expand...

What you are doing is right for you then.You just like showing your photos for others to look at and that's good.:clap: No need for any big watermarks :thumbs:
 
hayley.price said:
thats what they were saying to me but would that not ruin it even more



yes have always put them on the internet for people too see.



hmm okay



thank you



i do sell them occasionally but they only really go on facebook or flickr, if people ask for them i sell them but they are not particularly up online for sale.

i put the watermark there just so people looking at them know who took it haha
Click to expand...

reason i lower the opacity is when i run a dark one like you self i found my eye constantly getting drawn to the corner of the shot by my watermark and found it distracting :bonk:
 
Jayst84 said:
If your main reason for posting images is to share them, then don't stick an intrusive watermark on it. A tasteful watermark can help with branding if you feel the need.

And be aware that copyright and watermarks are two completely different things.
Click to expand...

^^^This.

You have copyright even if you don't visibly declare it on the visible image, or indeed reference it in the IPTC/metadata. That said many sites strip metadata and it can often be hard for people to find you as the copyright holder without a visible reference such as a watermark.

A watermark really only has two uses:

1) Directing people who are viewing your image to a means of contacting you. At the moment you are OK in so far as you have a distinctive name and a quick Google search finds you, and you alone. My policy is to take that to the next step and I have a full web address - others might put a mobile phone number as well - more likely if their work is news related and fast direct contact might be required. If I were you, and this was your intention then I'd use a less scripted, more basic font and consider either dropping a semi-opaque background to it to isolate it from the image more or changing the colour depending on the image. This also makes any attempt to avoid payment by citing orphan works a complete non-starter.

2) Deterring, but realistically not preventing people from copying/stealing your image. As has been mentioned above almost every watermark can be removed (and in many cases without destroying the image - at least when viewed on the web). Having a clear copyright/ownership statement will at least make them think, and make it a deliberate act rather than an ignorant one.

I'm with the sentiment here. If you don't expect payment, and don't mind if they are used without your permission then don't watermark them at all if you feel it detracts from the image.

If you do want to protect your work, then my advice is make the watermark significant enough to do the job you intend of it. Should anyone be really keen to see a cleaner version to make a final decision about whether to pay for it or not then they can contact you for a low-res sample. At the moment your watermark isn't significant enough as IMHO it doesn't cover enough of the image and is simple to remove.
 
hayley.price said:
ahh thanks guys think i will just leave it like this :)
Click to expand...

FWIW - and apologies I know this isn't up for critique but what really spoils this image for me is not the watermark but the green chromatic aberration around the edges of almost all of the specular highlights on the water.

I'm not sure if you use Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw but this should be relative easily to remove and would improve the overall image dramatically - a shame to leave it as it is given that the main subject is so well captured.
 
Intrusive watermarks are nasty, nasty things that only serve to annoy people.

When I see them, it reminds me of someothing I once ran across.
This was an amateur chap posting some quite interesting historical images, and trying to sell prints at frankly extortionate prices.
Now, oddly enough he had vanished into the ether, with no response to emails or anything, leaving behind various sets of images wrecked by this watermark.....

I can only presume he quickly found that selling something isn't as easy as it looks :P
 
Anything I'm prepared to share I'll just do without a watermark. They're easy things to get rid of.

Some folk like to put them on because they can show off a name or a link.

I like sharing or showing images on forums as much as the next man but if I don't want to risk it being nicked - I don't share it.
 
I dont want anyone to use my pictures without my permission but if they ask i am usual more then happy to give them a digital copy and just ask to make sure that they do not claim the picture as they own (no guarantee they wont but i always ask anyway).

my horse photos for shows do have a much larger watermark over the picture as i do sell them.

and thank you meonshore that was a very intrested read and has helped me alot thank you. and thanks for the tip about the green in the picture will remove it now :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top