I'm seeing a few topics on the matter of copyright and watermarking, and I see a lot of members take this precaution. I'm beginning to feel I should too.
Being a newbie on 365 I don't know all the tricks. If this has already been discussed, I apologize; point me in the right direction, please! ;-)
What I wonder is, can already uploaded/posted pictures be watermarked later? Can you upload a new, watermarked version? (Is even stealing pictures so big a problem as to make the hassle worth it?) How to?
@tamsg4 I'm having the same thought, but then I read people tell about it happening to them... @acrylicgem Mmm, yeah, I guess I would do that too. Some watermarks their work so vividly it actually destroys the art, I feel. It should be subtle and complementary, not a 'disturbance in the force'. ;-)
@bankmann In my opinion a watermark instantly ruins a photo no matter how good it is. There are plenty of ways to remove a watermark so is kinda of pointless anyway. If you put something on the net then you have to accept someone may rip it off.
I think that, if you're not seeling your prints, a watermark is totally unnecessary. Plus if someone really wants to steal your photo, a watermark is very easy to remove. It's kind of a waste of time. Plus I see many watermarks that ruin the photo; they can be distracting and take away from what might be a terrific photo w/o a watermark. Just my opinion, but definitely things to consider
@kimcampbellphotography But if you feel that you need a watermark in the middle covering the whole width of your photo, is it even worth it to post them on the internet? All I see is the watermark.
@kimcampbellphotography If someone wants to steal your photo, they can do it even if you cover the whole canvas in a watermark. People with scruples do not steal other people's work like that. Sorry that you have had some bad experiences, but I really don't see the point to defacing your work. I don't even look at photos with large watermarks and I am not alone in this.
@kimcampbellphotography even though @38mm hates watermarks, I put one one just about every one of my photos -- but it's not to protect them, it's to identify them. I looked at your few photos and I must say, I have a hard time enjoying your art when you've done what amounts to scribbling across the middle of the work. I'm sorry that you've had work stolen before, but it's the way of the world. Unless it was something amazing that you were about to make a lot of money on, is it really worth ruining the product of your craft online with a giant watermark through the middle? I take photos because I love taking photos. I am so very happy that people enjoy the photos I share and my style of work...but I want people to be able to enjoy the art - make it their wall paper on their computer, use it as their FB cover photo, whatever...
Anyway, In the US any image you take with your own camera is protected by copyright the instant you click the shutter. I am studying this very thing in art school right now. You can add a copyright to your EXIF when you export your photos in programs like Lightroom and Photoshop and I'm sure many others (that's just what I use). As well, limiting your image size and resolution can help ensure that no one will be making "fine prints" of your work without your knowledge.
I understand your position, especially considering past history, but again, it really takes away from your art. I think if I was that worried about having my work stolen, I wouldn't be posting photos on a public international site like 365.
@kimcampbellphotography Ok, this is a serious question. Do you sell images like the ones you have posted here? I sell sports photography and images from boudoir and family sessions that I do....but i have never sold any nature images because those are images that I produce for the love of the craft and for people to enjoy. I think you have to give a little if you are a photographer in this day and age and not worry so much about it. Do you make your living selling nature images? If so, please tell me your secret.
@kimcampbellphotography just so you know, and I swear I'm not trying to be an asshole here, but it took me exactly 14 seconds to remove your watermark from your latest photo with very little residual effect to the picture itself besides making it look more delicious.
@sdpace I've rarely come across a watermark that can't be removed in 30 seconds or less, using nothing besides the Content-Aware Tool. 30 seconds is at the VERY outside, too.
People are inherently lazy. It's just the way of the world. Unless you are Herb Ritts or Ansel Adams, I'm not going to bother with having to decipher what picture lies under a giant watermark. I'll dismiss the photo and move on.
@kimcampbellphotography i have a smugmug site which automatically watermarks with PROOF across the pic and doesn't allow right-click downloading. For this site and service, I pay about $100/year. I put images on the site, allow free (read: built into my sitting fee) small/low res downloads (like not even big enough to print a 4x6 nicely) and they can buy whatever images they want through that site, and the $ comes directly to me. I do this for my sports stuff as well.
When you say your images were "popping up all over," what does that mean? Where are you seeing them or how are you finding them?
@bankmann I have yet to have a single problem with my photos here on 365. I actually have had members volunteer to pay to have a photo or even been asked if they can place it on their wall. Because I am not a professional and I enjoy doing this for myself, I feel no need to watermark which in my mind can either be done very well @sdpace or it can turn out to be an awfully hot mess of ruining a photo. A watermark if any should deserve a light hand and tasteful design and not be distracting from the photo.
@kimcampbellphotography Was what supposed to be an insult? I have never had a photo stolen that I know of, I just wanted to see one that was. How is that an insult? Unless you're referring to something else I said...
@brumbe I agree; esthetics are important; watermarks should be elegangt when used. Personally I don't really mind watermarked pictures. I respect anyone's wish to protect their work. I'm not professional, so I don't really have an economic interest in this, but, sure, I want to be recognized at the creator of my own art.
I gave some pictures to the local fire department today. There was a fire down the road yesterday, and I got some pictures of the firemen sitting down for a breather afterwards. (I was on my way to work.) No pay, just the chance of showing som appreciation for their work. I admit I felt a little cool about this.
@5unflow3r and @kimcampbellphotography please don't get into a fight over this, ok? You both have valid points, and you don't see exactly eye to eye on the issue. That's cool. And at the same time you two illustrate something that is very valuable about this site; you both get to express your views. You are valuable, opinionated members of this community. That's cool. Disagree, but don't disembowl, please?
It's a little scary to spark off such a discussion in my first topic here. Clearly this is something people feel very strongly about. That's cool. This works. To quote Toyah Wilcox; "Be Proud, Be Loud, Be Heard"! ;-)
@bankmann Welcome to 365, where there can be drama in the discussions, but there is always something interesting.
I can see that if you donated your photos to an organization a small elegant watermark would be appropriate. I just see no need to mark them for the purpose of this site. If I was printing them, selling them or entering contests, I would not put a watermark on them so as to not distract from the art.
@bankmann Boy, you think this took off, bring up 'bokeh', 'what makes someone a real photographer', 'followers', or 'the Top 20'...and see what happens. :D
@beautifulthing@bankmann@brumbe or bring up "what's a real camera". That's often an angst-ridden discussion. Seriously though, I only asked a simple question. Sometimes a person's reaction to something is the real answer.
@kimcampbellphotography You make a really good point, and I honestly think you should make your watermarks more obtrusive, because they are apparently very, very, very easy to remove.
I was doubtful at first, but after I did some googling I actually found the pictures you linked to above in different internet forums, exactly as you said.
@kimcampbellphotography Kim, sorry you are not feeling well but it seems that it was not only ace members that were rude and that it was pretty much on both sides. It takes two to debate and it got a bit heated. I think the original thing was that someone was curious to see the photos that got stolen, then the second part was to mention that watermarks can be removed easily by anyone with photoshop or paintshop. You did not take kindly to this and it could be the fact that you mentioned that you are currently overwhelmed or that you just felt threatened. But no one was bullying you since you were getting quite feisty yourself. Bullying is a serious situation and it is important to use the word correctly. Strangers on a voluntary website not liking your watermark is offering an opinion. At no point did anyone threaten you if you kept your watermark on. Now that you are throwing out a threat to sue and that people should lawyer up, you are doing the bullying.
I as an Ace Member was nothing but kind to the person who started the discussion and offered him my opinion on an issue that I do feel a bit strongly about. But then again so did everyone else. In no way had I engaged you, but I feel that the emotions are a bit high on this one and I really resent having the term bully used as a former person who was physically bullied in middle school.
Also really, why are you wanting to sue, you offered links to your photos and was showing how watermarks protect you and someone was just showing that you are not as safe as you think and you took that as a personal account. Who is your attorney and in what city are they located in. It will help me select the best attorney to represent me for offering my opinion.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
@acrylicgem Mmm, yeah, I guess I would do that too. Some watermarks their work so vividly it actually destroys the art, I feel. It should be subtle and complementary, not a 'disturbance in the force'. ;-)
This is obviously something many have strong feelings about. And different feelings.
It's sad, really, that the only way to fight it is marring the pictures.
I'm a bit out on whether I'll watermark my own pictures. I guess I'll try a few things out, and see if I can find something I can live with.
Thanks, everyone for you opinions. Much appreciated!
Anyway, In the US any image you take with your own camera is protected by copyright the instant you click the shutter. I am studying this very thing in art school right now. You can add a copyright to your EXIF when you export your photos in programs like Lightroom and Photoshop and I'm sure many others (that's just what I use). As well, limiting your image size and resolution can help ensure that no one will be making "fine prints" of your work without your knowledge.
I understand your position, especially considering past history, but again, it really takes away from your art. I think if I was that worried about having my work stolen, I wouldn't be posting photos on a public international site like 365.
People are inherently lazy. It's just the way of the world. Unless you are Herb Ritts or Ansel Adams, I'm not going to bother with having to decipher what picture lies under a giant watermark. I'll dismiss the photo and move on.
When you say your images were "popping up all over," what does that mean? Where are you seeing them or how are you finding them?
I gave some pictures to the local fire department today. There was a fire down the road yesterday, and I got some pictures of the firemen sitting down for a breather afterwards. (I was on my way to work.) No pay, just the chance of showing som appreciation for their work. I admit I felt a little cool about this.
@5unflow3r and @kimcampbellphotography please don't get into a fight over this, ok? You both have valid points, and you don't see exactly eye to eye on the issue. That's cool. And at the same time you two illustrate something that is very valuable about this site; you both get to express your views. You are valuable, opinionated members of this community. That's cool. Disagree, but don't disembowl, please?
It's a little scary to spark off such a discussion in my first topic here. Clearly this is something people feel very strongly about. That's cool. This works. To quote Toyah Wilcox; "Be Proud, Be Loud, Be Heard"! ;-)
I can see that if you donated your photos to an organization a small elegant watermark would be appropriate. I just see no need to mark them for the purpose of this site. If I was printing them, selling them or entering contests, I would not put a watermark on them so as to not distract from the art.
I was doubtful at first, but after I did some googling I actually found the pictures you linked to above in different internet forums, exactly as you said.
Here are a couple of the links:
http://i.imgur.com/nPmMU.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/eItMp.jpg
Watermarking never really meant much to me, but now I guess I should give it some serious thought...
@kimcampbellphotography
I as an Ace Member was nothing but kind to the person who started the discussion and offered him my opinion on an issue that I do feel a bit strongly about. But then again so did everyone else. In no way had I engaged you, but I feel that the emotions are a bit high on this one and I really resent having the term bully used as a former person who was physically bullied in middle school.
Also really, why are you wanting to sue, you offered links to your photos and was showing how watermarks protect you and someone was just showing that you are not as safe as you think and you took that as a personal account. Who is your attorney and in what city are they located in. It will help me select the best attorney to represent me for offering my opinion.