How to copyright photos?

ryan_d50

ryan_d50

Suspended / Banned
Messages
16
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, i was wondering, could any one tell me how to copyright my photos, to prevent other people from pinching them off the internet/ social sites?

any help/ guidance would be great….
 
Copyright was automatically granted the moment you pressed the shutter button and created the image. However, if you want to add a watermark to your image, many photo apps will do this, or you can do it in photoshop by adding a text or graphic over the top. What software are you using?
 
Ryan, the only real way to stop people pinching them is not to upload them in the first place. Once they are online then they are vulnerable.

If you want to share them there are some steps you can take to deter people, like watermarking or only uploading very small sizes but any of these will impact on the viewer. It's a fine balance and only you can decide how much.
 
I wouldn't bother with watermarking. Unless you are posting shots that have a high commercial value - in which case you should send them to an agency or similar - the chances of your shots being stolen are minuscule. 3,500,000 pics are uploaded to Facebook alone, and that's EVERY DAY! Watermarks spoil pictures (which is really what a watermark is for if you think about it ;) )
If you want people to see your work, put them up and don't worry about them being shared. If you are worried, don't.
 
Last edited:
If you want, put a small unobtrusive watermark at the foot of your image, it lets people know who's photo it is and informs peole who think in ignorance that they can use anything on the internet legally, that they can't.
I don't think that ruins the shot and if it does then tough. Your copyright info will also be on your camera exif data embedded in the image but sites like facebook kindly strip this out.
 
jon ryan said:
I wouldn't bother with watermarking.
Click to expand...


I don t knwo what the OP is doing.. but if I took your advice I would be out of business..


jon ryan said:
the chances of your shots being stolen are minuscule.
Click to expand...


I probably have the ugliest biggest watermark about.. people still steal them ..hundreds a week get stolen.. you can see facebook profiles wiht big ugly green lines through faces....


jon ryan said:
Watermarks spoil pictures (which is really what a watermark is for if you think about it ;) )
Click to expand...

exactly.. anyone wants an unspoiled picture from me then they have to pay not steal.


jon ryan said:
If you want people to see your work, put them up and don't worry about them being shared. If you are worried, don't.
Click to expand...


complete and utter tosh...if they want to share they need to pay


IMHO if your doing any sort of event photogrpahy.. then completely ignore every sinmgle word of jons advice...
 
If - that's IF - the OP is in the business of selling photos, then I agree - did you see what I said about shots with commercial value? Most people don't make their friends pay to share their snaps from social sites...
 
The photographer owns the copyright by default in the UK, unless the photographs were taken in the course of their employment, or transferred to another party by agreement. You don't have to register them or anything like that, and you don't have to put a copyright symbol on them.

You can watermark the images before you publish them, but this probably won't deter someone who really wants to steal them. Don't put the images online if it's really important to you.
 
jon ryan said:
If - that's IF - the OP is in the business of selling photos, then I agree - did you see what I said about shots with commercial value? Most people don't make their friends pay to share their snaps from social sites...
Click to expand...

But that's how it starts, share on facebook, friends share to other friends and then somebody else sees a shot and uses it without permission. Many shots have commercial value you only have to look at some of the stuff that gets sold by Alamy and a rubbish photo can make money if it is what somebody needs to illustrate and edtorial.
I do agree that it is easy to get carried away with the idea and I agree there is a lot of stuff on facebook etc but there are also lots of people trawling flickr and the likes for free images.
My shots are my shots and I will watermark them when posting on facebook, flickr et al and if it ruins the viewing experience for a few then I'm afraid that is too bad. On my portfolio site I don't watermark becase I am selling images and don't want to ruin the experience but that is my risk.
 
Steve-T said:
My shots are my shots and I will watermark them when posting on facebook, flickr et al and if it ruins the viewing experience for a few then I'm afraid that is too bad. On my portfolio site I don't watermark becase I am selling images and don't want to ruin the experience but that is my risk.
Click to expand...

This.. its the difference between pictures posted for viewing pleasure/portfolio.. these dont need a watermark ruining them.. or could ahve a small bottom corner.. But anything you are selling requires a more robust watermark in the middle of the picture or you lose it.. pctures for sale.. proper good watermark.. pictures for pleasure...not so much
 
rain_cloud said:
Staff edit: removed spam link
Click to expand...


5 minutes after you post about software i ahve never heard of before.. i get an email

Subject: Software Introduction
From: Mass Watermark
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:10:25 +0000

Hey ,

Hope you are doing great :)

We are the makers of a Photo
Watermarking and Post Processing Software called Mass Watermark.
Our
product is being used by a photographers,Bloggers and small business
owners to protect their work online.

Unlike other products Mass
Watermark has been designed to cut out the time of regular photo
processing by
integrating the processes of
watermarking,re-sizing,adding-exif,optimizing and direct upload to
Picasa/Flickr in
a single workflow rather than multiple ones.

I just
wanted to welcome you to try our product.

more info -
masswatermark(dot)com

Looking forward to hear from you soon

Best,

Mass Watermark Team
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
Click to expand...



Post edited to remove links but leaving information for others. Thanks for the heads up Tony, we do not appreciate companies using TP in this manner, so if the poster is still reading, please do feel free to contact admin regarding an advertising account.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[devil'sadvocate]In the same way that copyright infringements should get billed, maybe Slack Media should bill spammers?[/devil'sadvocate]
 
U upload small images to the web no bigger that 800px long edge. The fb compresses them further. I put my name under it but not of the pic. If people are sad enough to use them to print 6x4 crap quality prints then ok. Id rather that than have an ugly watermark ruin my work. I guess if you shoot landscape watermarks are worse as they cover vital areas of the shot
 
barratt1988 said:
U upload small images to the web no bigger that 800px long edge. The fb compresses them further. I put my name under it but not of the pic. If people are sad enough to use them to print 6x4 crap quality prints then ok. Id rather that than have an ugly watermark ruin my work. I guess if you shoot landscape watermarks are worse as they cover vital areas of the shot
Click to expand...


its not all about people printing them.. its about them using on other websites.. why let them do that for free?
 
barratt1988 said:
If your going to put a watermark on the shot you may aswell not put in on the net though?
Click to expand...

eh? not being funny but are you even following the thread? If I/anyone covers an event and have maybe 100 pictures to sell to parents/fans/whatever online.. how would you suggest we do this? If we dont watermark then they just pinch them.. if we dont put online then they cant buy them.... seriously what approach are you suggesting ?
 
KIPAX said:
eh? not being funny but are you even following the thread? If I/anyone covers an event and have maybe 100 pictures to sell to parents/fans/whatever online.. how would you suggest we do this? If we dont watermark then they just pinch them.. if we dont put online then they cant buy them.... seriously what approach are you suggesting ?
Click to expand...

Have a site which doesnt allow right clicking on images. Thus they cant save them. If they wana screen shot then ok but you cant do anything with that.
 
barratt1988 said:
Have a site which doesnt allow right clicking on images. Thus they cant save them. If they wana screen shot then ok but you cant do anything with that.
Click to expand...

the way the www works is that every picture you look at.. has to be downloaded to your computer for you to see it... as soon as you look at a picture its on your computer in your browsers cache..

stopping right click is about as lame as it gets.. theres is absoloutly no way in the world to stop people copying your pictures..

as for cant do anythign with a screen grab.... why not ? can you explain what cant be done with a screen grab ?
 
barratt1988 said:
Have a site which doesnt allow right clicking on images. Thus they cant save them. If they wana screen shot then ok but you cant do anything with that.
Click to expand...

Open HTML source, find .jpg in text.

Copy into browser and save or use wget which won't run the JavaScript that prevents copying. About 5 secs to circumvent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jin
Jin said:
or upload low-res versions.
Click to expand...


you where doing alright ..perfect in fact...until you got to this bit.. thus proving you didnt even bother reading the thread....
 
KIPAX said:
you where doing alright ..perfect in fact...until you got to this bit.. thus proving you didnt even bother reading the thread....
Click to expand...

No it just proves that I didn't wholly agree with your opinion.

If people are want to steal your images, they are going to steal your images. Depending on your watermark complexity even those can be PS out of an image to a degree which is unnoticeable when the image is downscaled.

Let's take one of your images for example.

http://www.kipax.com/gallery/albums/SCHOOLS_H/3032/stmarys_kidscup_01.jpg

A very simple watermark which considering the block colouring and simplicity of the shapes in this image it wouldn't be very difficult for a little help with PS to remove enough of this image for me to reduce it to a size suitable for an article.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well it just proves my point doesn't it.

In fact as you have such lovely quality images on your website I could probably start editing out the watermarks and fencing them. Of course the legalities of which don't need to be questioned but considering you so defiantly tried to pass your opinion as fact and I have quite simply proved how ineffective your methods are just proves that not even you are infallible.
 
People chill out bloody hell. Thats the problem with TP if someone has an opinion thay someone else doesnt like all hell breaks loose. If you dnt want a shot used then watermark it. But also expect it to put people off. So upload a small image and if people wana use it itl be for a postcard size print.

Just seems this thread is pointless as KIPAX wouldnt be happy with any suggestion
 
Please don't hotlink to other people's photos. You may link to them, like I've shown in the post above.
 
Looks as if the answers have served to frighten off the OP...


Welcome to TP, OP. :meh: :indifferent:
 
I watermark my images but I don't expect it to stop everyone, anyone determined will have your images if they want them. I think the main thing to consider when posting images on the web is will the publicity/audience reach you can achieve by doing so far outweigh the potential negatives of some unscrupulous individuals not wanting to pay for them, I find it easily does so take my chances.. it's a simple decision to make and nothing to really get too stressed about. Infact you run similar risks, albeit smaller scale perhaps, by displaying prints in galleries etc.. there's always the chance someone might do a bit of shoplifting, it's recently happened to me, the reward vs. risk still works greatly in my favour though so I'm not going to stop selling my work in those places.

Simon
 
If someone wants the photo that bad, they will take it no matter what watermark or systems you try and put into place. The film and music industry plough millions into trying to stop people lifting their IP, but it still happens. The only condolence you have is that there are laws to protect you, BUT is it worthwhile chasing them?
 
Woblee said:
If someone wants the photo that bad, they will take it no matter what watermark or systems you try and put into place. The film and music industry plough millions into trying to stop people lifting their IP, but it still happens. The only condolence you have is that there are laws to protect you, BUT is it worthwhile chasing them?
Click to expand...
Oh yes, it is worth chasing them, especially if they are based in the UK, US or probably Western Europe, and not too difficult either. However if it on a Russian or Chinese blog then forget it.

Another problem in this scenario is when an image has been sold and used legitamitely to (say) a newspaper website and then lifted from there and goes viral. Not much you can do about it really.
 
Last edited:
Yeah. A prominent watermark may deter casual theft - just like a burglar alarm system - but it won't stop someone who is determined and knows what they're doing. I also remember some threads a while back with posts about people nicking images and putting them on Facebook complete with the watermarks, and even printing them. They looked dreadful, but they were "free".............
 
Watermarks.

Some people need them... some people don't.

For instance. If I was an event photographer, like many, I'd be uploading images from the day to a website, so that people could preview them, and order them. If there was no watermark.... people would just download them. Even if they were low res images... they'd still download them and not buy them. That's the general public for you. Never try and sell the technical quality of your work to Joe Public.. they're not arsed. In this situation, I'd watermark the images to death.... right across the image. Same with social portraiture, sports photography... stuff where it goes straight online, and people could be highly motivated to steal it, and use it for their own financial gain.

If I was an amateur just taking... let's say landscapes... Why would I need to watermark it? I would never put a watermark on my images. I mean.. You don't see Joe Cornish putting watermarks on his images... nor do you see Charlie Waite putting them on his either so why should you? Why do YOUR images need it when theirs don't? Is your work more desirable somehow? It just ruins the image for no practical reason. Even if you did watermark them... being a landscape, the watermark is probably down in the corner somewhere.... so it would be removable in seconds should I wish to use your image illegally. What's the point?

Maybe you do it for publicity?.. well.. where are they seeing the work? If it's on your website... then they already know who you are... ditto with Facebook.... ditto in here.... ditto on Flickr.... ditto in 500PX.... ditto on your blog... I never got that reason either.

Pretty much sums it up for me. Watermarks can be a necessary evil... so use them when their necessary... meaning where NOT using them costs you actual money... otherwise don't. What's the point?
 
Last edited:
Maybe the watermark could usefully contain contact information, like an email address, for those images that are less likely to be copied. So for me, an amateur taking landscapes, if I add a small copyright symbol and email address bottom left it means if someone likes my image enough to want a real print to hang on their wall then they can easily contact me to arrange it. Keep it small and un-intrusive and it's less likely to get some bright spark shopping it out before they share it.

Charlie Waite etc don't need to do this because they're famous enough and google/tin eye might well turn up the source for someone who wants a print for their wall, but who knows who I am?

Agree about event & social photographs etc.

This is an area where no-one is likely to be happy or agreeable because the present system is broken and unenforceable (and many consider any image published to the internet as being in the public domain - for them it's not theft).
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
Maybe the watermark could usefully contain contact information, like an email address, for those images that are less likely to be copied. So for me, an amateur taking landscapes, if I add a small copyright symbol and email address bottom left it means if someone likes my image enough to want a real print to hang on their wall then they can easily contact me to arrange it. Keep it small and un-intrusive and it's less likely to get some bright spark shopping it out before they share it.

Charlie Waite etc don't need to do this because they're famous enough and google/tin eye might well turn up the source for someone who wants a print for their wall, but who knows who I am?

Agree about event & social photographs etc.

This is an area where no-one is likely to be happy or agreeable because the present system is broken and unenforceable (and many consider any image published to the internet as being in the public domain - for them it's not theft).
Click to expand...
This^ I watermark small at the foot of the image and it always contains my website url, I know many pros who do the same. As you say CW and JC do not need to and they are so well known that if there images were 'knicked' then they would soon find out about it.

I also agree re event photos and that ilk, it would be daft not to watermark them.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Maybe the watermark could usefully contain contact information, like an email address, for those images that are less likely to be copied. So for me, an amateur taking landscapes, if I add a small copyright symbol and email address bottom left it means if someone likes my image enough to want a real print to hang on their wall then they can easily contact me to arrange it.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't they be seeing the image on a website that would allow them to contact you anyway? If it's on your own site, you could just put the e-mail address on the site instead of each image? If it's Flickr, 500px, Facebook... in fact anywhere of that type... they can message you directly anyway. Even in a Google image search, it would still refer you back to the website/sevice that hosts the image, so they can contact you that way.

Watermarks suck. If you don't need them, don't use them... surely... unless you just think they look cool... but struggling to think of an aesthetic reason for having them.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Wouldn't they be seeing the image on a website that would allow them to contact you anyway? If it's on your own site, you could just put the e-mail address on the site instead of each image? If it's Flickr, 500px, Facebook... in fact anywhere of that type... they can message you directly anyway. Even in a Google image search, it would still refer you back to the website/sevice that hosts the image, so they can contact you that way.

Watermarks suck. If you don't need them, don't use them... surely... unless you just think they look cool... but struggling to think of an aesthetic reason for having them.
Click to expand...

Watermarks are of no use on your own site - they will only be meaningful if someone takes your image to use elsewhere. Therefore a small and unintrusive mark that doesn't spoil the image is less likely to be removed when they copy/paste to facebook or where ever, and may allow you to still get sales or recognition from your 'lost' image. If you do an image search it's not unusual to see the same image served off lots of different sites, none of whom credit or link to the originator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top