Watermarks - pros & cons?

[dtokez]

Just wondering about watermarking. A lot of people do add them, but more seem to choose not too. Personally I did do some before uploading to flickr but then kind of forgot.

Interested to hear views on them, is there any advantage of using them - copyrighting etc?

Would like to see examples from you guys if you use one - please post them

 

[D.P.]

In the film days it was useful buy with digital you can embed al your copyright and contact details in the IPTC data which makes it much more powerful and less obtusive. Unless the watermark obscures the image it doesn't add much security and if you do platsrr tour image with giant watermarks then ni one can enjoy the photo.

You can use watermarks as a form of marketing by trying to your images distributed widely over the interent so if you are purposely spamming it everywhere with the hopes it gets spread and directs traffic to your site then the have some merit.

 

[DBT85]

Most can be removed easily so unless it's in the main part of the image then the argument is why bother. On the flip side, all the people that see it and don't try to steal a copy for something will see who took it and maybe use the Web link, if one is in the watermark.

So, they don't protect you from much, so make them inoffensive.

 

[dtokez]

That's true, I guess unless the watermark is hard to remove it cant really be much help with copyrighting.

I don't mind them if they are not too obtrusive and in a corner somewhere - what do you guys think?

 

[DBT85]

Mine is in the bottom right corner, just my name and my website logo. Will probably add the web address to the next version when I get around to the website revamp.

 

[Amp34]

I have mine in the bottom right as well. Just a basic image showing where the image is from. That way if it is posted elsewhere It still shows as being mine. It'll also stop most opportunists from sticking it on any "official" promotional material (eg company websites or posters).

Yes people can remove it but then I don't upload anything big enough to be used properly anyway. It's better than having info just in the exif as that is far easier extracted and most are unlikely to look there anyway.

We are setting up a new website at the moment and images, with a watermark will be used to drive people to the site via our social media accounts and the website itself.

They have their benefits but also you should know the limitations. Just don't stick a giant "copyright" and your name on as it looks cheap and nasty. Your photo is automatically copyright anyway (not that most people realise...)

 

[dtokez]

some good points here people. I think I might start adding a really small one, the hard thing is to get it right first time for consistency lol

 

[DBT85]

Are you using Lightroom? You can have it to apply a watermark every time it exports if you want. That way you just need to pick a watermark and set a maximum size you want it to be.

 

[jonneymendoza]

if i had a shot i absolutely did not want anyone stealing id place a watermark right down the center of my image.

 

[neil_g]

depends what youre trying to acheive.

we used to slap a huge one across the middle of our online event proofs and people still screen printed them for facebook. even though we only charged something like £2 for a low res image with a less obtrusive WM for social media.

 

[D.P.]

if i had a shot i absolutely did not want anyone stealing id place a watermark right down the center of my image.

I simply wouldn't put it online.

My absolute best photos for my life portfolio are no where to be seen.

 

[D.P.]

depends what youre trying to acheive.

we used to slap a huge one across the middle of our online event proofs and people still screen printed them for facebook. even though we only charged something like £2 for a low res image with a less obtrusive WM for social media.

All too common practice sadly.

 

[dtokez]

Yeah some people annoy me on Facebook etc, they don't care about image quality etc and just post it up, spoiling the hard work of the photographer!

 

[doodah]

Holy thread revival and noob alert. I am just finishing up editing my first paid wedding photos but haven't got round to using a watermark yet.

What's the etiquette? I am giving them digital copies via a cloud solution and USB drives. Do people slap them on across the board or just when posting online?

 

[Combat squirrel]

What's interesting is - everyone thinks their photos are so precious everyone thinks they will defo be nicked if not watermarked

Ermm no, I just watermark lower right - purely because am a full time tog and its brand identity - if someone wants to remove a watermark these days its a 2 min job in photoshop - so sure, brand identity, but not so someone won't nick them.

@doodah just small lower right for your identity online, the client no watermarks

 

[doodah]

Sweet, that's what I thought but wanted to double check. Will leave it out then and pending their permission, only add to any I add on my yet to be made portfolio.

 

[socreative]

For my portraits I usually put watermark next to the subject. For landscapes usually to the bottom. My view on this is, I use it not to protect my photos from stealing but rather for helping people find me if they want. So unless you're known enough and have a very distinguished style so your photos are easily recognised I see watermarks as helpers really.

 

[jonneymendoza]

I simply wouldn't put it online.

My absolute best photos for my life portfolio are no where to be seen.

Then how would u obtain new clients if they cant see your best work?Portfolio is supposed to show your absolute best work