I've just spent the afternoon at a local Rugby League game with some mates, & of course I took the camera along with me... It's my first time I've had a chance to shoot a sporting event, so there are plenty of 'oops', 'darn' & 'buggerit' moments in looking back through the shots - but still plenty that I'm happy with too!
So I'm just downloading them now, but I'm planning on:
A/ using my best one or two for my today shots in 365 (ACE member)
B/ uploading a large album of them on my Facebook page with the as many shots that have come out clear & I'd class as acceptable for the public to see so that those who played & those who were there can see them too...
For the Facebook album I plan to use lower res shots & want to Watermark them, so that if someone really likes one of the shots they can't just copy them, but can contact me & I can arrange prints for them (with a little mark up too)...
I already do a 'mark' on my shots I load up to 365 (when I have the time... occasionally I'm in too much of a rush to get it on there). But when I do it, it's after I've loaded the image to 365, then I access Picnik & add my discrete mark there...
MY MAIN QUESTION IS: how can I put a more obvious large but 'transparent' watermark onto say 200 images? Is there a way to do it in Mass form? or do I have to do it seperately for each individual image? what software & how?
& also, if doing prints for others... what kind of mark up do you add to the cost of getting them printed?
Really looking forward to seeing the responses to this... Thanks in advance ;-)
Sounds like you had a fun afternoon! I'm sorry to say I have no idea to any of your questions but would be very interested to also know if & how it could be done! =D
I don't know if you use photoshop, but there is a way to create a watermark there and save it as a brush so you don't have to do all of the steps everytime. I'm not sure whether or not this can be done as a batch or not. Check out this thread by Jinx ( I'm not sure this answers the batch question either, hopefully someone else will chime in with that answer): http://365project.org/discuss/tips-n-tricks/2024/watermarking-in-photoshop-how-to
As far as prints go you need to take into consideration all of the time you took taking the photos, uploading, editing, and then how much to you want to profit- ask yourself , "how much am I worth per hour". I am not yet at the point where I feel comfortable charging a large amount for prints- I have seen people here on this site an others that list their 8x10s at US $50. I am not there yet, but I do charge a fair amount, and recently increased my rate. Where do you have your prints made?
Lightroom can batch-watermark easily - probably the simplest way to do it. You just choose the option on export, and export the whole lot at once. Photoshop can too, but you have to set up the watermark, an action for it, and then run it through the batch processing which takes the files from a source folder, watermarks them, and places the new versions into a destination folder. Easy if you've done it before, but tricky for a first-timer. I suggest Lightroom (Lightroom 3 is the best version for it).
As for price, Rebbecca stated it very well. I price differently for different situations. For portraits, for example, I charge a lot more than I do for sporting shots, because I don't spend much time editing for sporting shots. I would typically charge $10 per 5x7 for sports, because I batch edit in Lightroom, and that takes next to no time at all (compared to hours of portrait editing).
thanks guys for the feedback, I'd started doing the Photoshop way a little blindly even though there had been links on the 'how to'... I'm a little slow that way, as I'm still learning Photoshop - So I'm very glad Jinx jumped in at that very moment & said Lightroom could!!! It worked a treat! THANK YOU! I'll post one soon, to show the differnce between my normal Mark & this "don't steal" my photo watermark...
If you already have Lightroom, you can easily add watermarks in a batch action. Same goes for Photoshop. It looks like you've already got that part figured out pretty good.
Keep on thing in mind though: upload the photos cropped at 720pixels on the longest side at only 72DPI. That is considered "web-safe" and is a low enough resolution that even if someone steals your photo and erases your watermark, they won't be getting much more than a 3"x5" print out of it.
@jasonbarnette thank you... you are a fountain of information @sdpace was right about that!
sadly thats where my knowledge fails me at this point in my experience but that is the kind of stuff I'm keen to learn...
Yes I have Lightroom & use it most often over Photoshop...
the info in my watermark... sufficient? I'm unsure if I right "copyright" on my images, if it truely has any standing or is just a waste of time... any feedback there?
United States Copyright Law begins the moment you snap the photo. Legally speaking, you do not have to write anything for your work to be protected.
The watermark does not guarantee your copyright, it only deters thieves. I think your watermark is sufficient because it prevents anyone from really stealing your photo and making prints. That is the true purpose of the watermark.
Court cases have found, however, that if the photographer adds "Copyright [Year] [Photographer's Name]" under each photo, it is a slam dunk case for the photographer. Just makes it easier if you ever have to sue, which hopefully you won't.
@jasonbarnette thank you so much for that, not that for this task itself I'm planning on sueing anyone!! as I plan to get feedback as a learning experience & it would simply be a bonus (& a pat on my back, in my own mind) if someone actually ever wanted a print of mine ;-) but that is very good info for future reference & I will look at adjusting my mark on my 365 shots to include that.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
As far as prints go you need to take into consideration all of the time you took taking the photos, uploading, editing, and then how much to you want to profit- ask yourself , "how much am I worth per hour". I am not yet at the point where I feel comfortable charging a large amount for prints- I have seen people here on this site an others that list their 8x10s at US $50. I am not there yet, but I do charge a fair amount, and recently increased my rate. Where do you have your prints made?
As for price, Rebbecca stated it very well. I price differently for different situations. For portraits, for example, I charge a lot more than I do for sporting shots, because I don't spend much time editing for sporting shots. I would typically charge $10 per 5x7 for sports, because I batch edit in Lightroom, and that takes next to no time at all (compared to hours of portrait editing).
thanks guys for the feedback, I'd started doing the Photoshop way a little blindly even though there had been links on the 'how to'... I'm a little slow that way, as I'm still learning Photoshop - So I'm very glad Jinx jumped in at that very moment & said Lightroom could!!! It worked a treat! THANK YOU! I'll post one soon, to show the differnce between my normal Mark & this "don't steal" my photo watermark...
Thanks again :-)
see image ONLY for the watermark - NOT the quality of photo (that was added as part of Jani & Paula's humorous "crappy photo challenge"
Keep on thing in mind though: upload the photos cropped at 720pixels on the longest side at only 72DPI. That is considered "web-safe" and is a low enough resolution that even if someone steals your photo and erases your watermark, they won't be getting much more than a 3"x5" print out of it.
Do you have Lightroom?
sadly thats where my knowledge fails me at this point in my experience but that is the kind of stuff I'm keen to learn...
Yes I have Lightroom & use it most often over Photoshop...
the info in my watermark... sufficient? I'm unsure if I right "copyright" on my images, if it truely has any standing or is just a waste of time... any feedback there?
The watermark does not guarantee your copyright, it only deters thieves. I think your watermark is sufficient because it prevents anyone from really stealing your photo and making prints. That is the true purpose of the watermark.
Court cases have found, however, that if the photographer adds "Copyright [Year] [Photographer's Name]" under each photo, it is a slam dunk case for the photographer. Just makes it easier if you ever have to sue, which hopefully you won't.