Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Watermark

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Watermark

    I recently created a website via Zenfolio and just used one of the watermarks they offered. For the time being I just want a simple watermark...my name with a nice font. This is what I've come up with and would like some opinions.

    Is it too large/distracting?

    Does it show up good enough on different backgrounds?

    Should I make it more opaque?

    Here are some examples....





    Jack Baker Photos
    Canon EOS 7D-gripped/ EOS Rebel T3/ EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM/ EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM/ EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM/ EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS/ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II/ EF 50mm f/1.4 USM/ EF 85mm f/1.8 USM/ Extender EF 2x III/ Speedlite 600EX-RT/ (3) Yongnuo Speedlite YN560-II/ Yongnuo RF-603C Flash Triggers

  • #2
    Watermarks = 100% useless.

    Why? Photoshop. If someone wants to TAKE your image and remove that watermark...done. And you can't do crap about it without a silly amount of legal fees.

    If you put a watermark on your image..in my opinion, it flat out ruins it.

    The moon shot - doesn't need a watermark. Pictures of the moon have been taken ever since Lippershey invented the telescope. Nothing about it is original or unique. Who cares if someone steals a photo of the moon?
    moreinmind.com - photo & design

    Twitter - @KevanMorin

    Comment


    • #3
      If you are looking for the watermark to simply advertise you, then I guess it is OK - although I can hardly see it in #2 and #3. If you are looking to provide "some" protection against theft/unauthorised use, then this is not going to cut it. Placing it there means a simple crop will remove it - the thief doesn't need any cloning or healing tools.
      Maximum effectiveness - at least in the centre of the image. You will then need to decide if that kind of placement is the price you are willing to pay for viewing the image. Some photographer's hate it, others see it as a necessary evil. More effective is the watermark being repeated multiple times over the image - not around the edges. The idea is that the thief can't be bothered and will move on to easier pickings.
      For a watermark that works equally well on dark and light backgrounds, you might want to think about a "bevel and emboss" effect. Bold text is harder to clone away than very thin.
      Only you can decided if your circumstances dictate the use of watermarks. I watermark every image I upload to my website +20,000 ... because my main "lookers" are kids.
      I also only upload low res 1000px images. Does that stop the kids from pinching photos - hell no ... BUT/BUT/BUT not once have the kids removed my watermark so every person who looks at their facebook site, knows who took the photo. They also can't print much of a photo. But the kids are not interested in printing. They only want to share or show online or in phones.
      So you decide how important watermark will be and balance it against the aesthetic qualities of your images and balance it against what role you want the watermark to play (advertising, security, etc).

      Comment


      • #4
        I will now show you a thread I had about a photo that had a "watermark" but more so just some advertising

        Here is the link
        All Photos Taken With NikonD5100 & 35mm Prime. Love The Challenge!

        PhotosbyKyle.ca

        Check Out My Instagram!

        Comment


        • #5
          Watermarks = 100% useless.
          This isn't exactly true.

          Watermarks are fantastic for viral marketing (ie across social media).

          Also, they can help prevent theft. It's true, if someone REALLY wants it, they will get it. But watermarking your images is like parking your bentley next to a mondeo - people will steal the mondeo because it's less effort. (and like wise, if people really want a Bentley, they'll take it anyway)

          To the OP, think about your watermark from outside the box. Your watermark should be easy to trace, there are 41,400,000 results for "jack baker" on Google, I didn't look, but I'm guessing most of the result pages don't show you ;P
          Last edited by Biomech; 01-17-2013, 01:10 PM.
          Art: www.jamieorourke.co.uk
          Work: www.jamieorourkephotography.co.uk
          Sony a200 Sony a580, Canon 500D, Canon 550D, Canon 600D, Canon 600D

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by SLWRTHNU View Post
            I will now show you a thread I had about a photo that had a "watermark" but more so just some advertising

            Here is the link
            I like your new watermark - looks good, covers the important parts (and lots of it) but is subtle enough to still appreciate the image.
            Sad to read your story - but probably a lesson that some watermark placements are not that effective.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Biomech View Post
              This isn't exactly true.

              Watermarks are fantastic for viral marketing (ie across social media).

              Also, they can help prevent theft. It's true, if someone REALLY wants it, they will get it. But watermarking your images is like parking your bentley next to a mondeo - people will steal the mondeo because it's less effort. (and like wise, if people really want a Bentley, they'll take it anyway)

              To the OP, think about your watermark from outside the box. Your watermark should be easy to trace, there are 41,400,000 results for "jack baker" on Google, I didn't look, but I'm guessing most of the result pages don't show you ;P
              What then in your opinion would be better, I quickly did that to get rid of the giant "C" in the middle that Zenfolio has as a choice for watermarks.

              Does Google/others use watermarks as keywords when searching?

              Would "Jack Baker Photos" be better? When I search "Jack Baker Photos" on Google my site shows up near the top...at least on my machine it does.

              Thanks for the reply!
              Jack Baker Photos
              Canon EOS 7D-gripped/ EOS Rebel T3/ EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM/ EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM/ EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM/ EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS/ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II/ EF 50mm f/1.4 USM/ EF 85mm f/1.8 USM/ Extender EF 2x III/ Speedlite 600EX-RT/ (3) Yongnuo Speedlite YN560-II/ Yongnuo RF-603C Flash Triggers

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by AceCo55 View Post
                If you are looking for the watermark to simply advertise you, then I guess it is OK - although I can hardly see it in #2 and #3. If you are looking to provide "some" protection against theft/unauthorised use, then this is not going to cut it. Placing it there means a simple crop will remove it - the thief doesn't need any cloning or healing tools.
                Maximum effectiveness - at least in the centre of the image. You will then need to decide if that kind of placement is the price you are willing to pay for viewing the image. Some photographer's hate it, others see it as a necessary evil. More effective is the watermark being repeated multiple times over the image - not around the edges. The idea is that the thief can't be bothered and will move on to easier pickings.
                For a watermark that works equally well on dark and light backgrounds, you might want to think about a "bevel and emboss" effect. Bold text is harder to clone away than very thin.
                Only you can decided if your circumstances dictate the use of watermarks. I watermark every image I upload to my website +20,000 ... because my main "lookers" are kids.
                I also only upload low res 1000px images. Does that stop the kids from pinching photos - hell no ... BUT/BUT/BUT not once have the kids removed my watermark so every person who looks at their facebook site, knows who took the photo. They also can't print much of a photo. But the kids are not interested in printing. They only want to share or show online or in phones.
                So you decide how important watermark will be and balance it against the aesthetic qualities of your images and balance it against what role you want the watermark to play (advertising, security, etc).

                I tried to find your site to check it out but couldn't.
                Jack Baker Photos
                Canon EOS 7D-gripped/ EOS Rebel T3/ EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM/ EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM/ EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM/ EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS/ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II/ EF 50mm f/1.4 USM/ EF 85mm f/1.8 USM/ Extender EF 2x III/ Speedlite 600EX-RT/ (3) Yongnuo Speedlite YN560-II/ Yongnuo RF-603C Flash Triggers

                Comment


                • #9
                  Changed the watermark again...photos above reflect the new one...not sure if it is much better but should point to my site better if someone should try to find it based on the watermark.
                  Jack Baker Photos
                  Canon EOS 7D-gripped/ EOS Rebel T3/ EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM/ EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM/ EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM/ EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS/ EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II/ EF 50mm f/1.4 USM/ EF 85mm f/1.8 USM/ Extender EF 2x III/ Speedlite 600EX-RT/ (3) Yongnuo Speedlite YN560-II/ Yongnuo RF-603C Flash Triggers

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jaxhouse View Post
                    I tried to find your site to check it out but couldn't.
                    I have sent you a pm

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Biomech View Post
                      This isn't exactly true.

                      Watermarks are fantastic for viral marketing (ie across social media).

                      Also, they can help prevent theft. It's true, if someone REALLY wants it, they will get it. But watermarking your images is like parking your bentley next to a mondeo - people will steal the mondeo because it's less effort. (and like wise, if people really want a Bentley, they'll take it anyway)

                      To the OP, think about your watermark from outside the box. Your watermark should be easy to trace, there are 41,400,000 results for "jack baker" on Google, I didn't look, but I'm guessing most of the result pages don't show you ;P

                      Yip there no harm in watermarking your images, its just a bit of trial and error to get it right.

                      all the best
                      John Hendry Photo

                      John Hendry Photo

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        can you tell me about watermark tool allows us to watermark any of my photos with a variety set of options ?
                        Jual Beli online

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I put a watermark just to leave my mark in an image; I designed my logo and that's my watermark/signature so I feel like it's just like signing my art. However unlike many water markers(not sure how to classify that group o_o ) I set my watermark to 25px brush in Photoshop place it somewhere on the clients clothes however with a very transparent opacity so it would only be noticed by me (well and you now...) if I zoomed in a lot.
                          Visit my Website (:

                          Also you should go ahead and visit my Facebook page Tyler Randall - PhotoShoots
                          Oh and don't forget to like it (:

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I've thought about doing that, a small "mark" that you don't see unless you look for it. Then you don't have people saying it ruins the image, but you can prove its yours. The only downside is when people steal the image and downsize it and the mark gets lost
                            Art: www.jamieorourke.co.uk
                            Work: www.jamieorourkephotography.co.uk
                            Sony a200 Sony a580, Canon 500D, Canon 550D, Canon 600D, Canon 600D

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Eh. I'm not really worried about my images getting stolen; if they are stolen however I'm sure I wouldn't need a watermark to prove it's mine.
                              Visit my Website (:

                              Also you should go ahead and visit my Facebook page Tyler Randall - PhotoShoots
                              Oh and don't forget to like it (:

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X