To watermark or not to watermark for online posting of your images

[noisycheese]

I am wondering how the august ladies and gents of this forum regard watermarking images for posting online. I am not talking about the big, ugly, obnoxious watermarks plastered across the center of the image in block letters that render viewing and enjoying the image impossible.

The type of watermark I am thinking of using would be in the lower right area of the image - a font and size of professional appearance, as small as is possible while still being visible, legible and tastefully designed.

So that is my question - if a watermark were tastefully designed and did not totally ruin the viewer's ability to view and enjoy the image online, would you use such a watermark on your images that you post online?

Thanks for your input on this!

 

[jwicaksana]

If it is tasteful as you described, then yes, I like it. In some cases I feel like it also added a certain kind of credibility to the poster. But I am too lazy, I just batch export everything from LR. ;P

 

[RichW]

I use a basic typewriter style font (nothing fancy) of my name in the lower right corner of my images, oh and as for the previous poster I apply mine in Lightroom when I batch export my images 🙂, it's a simple setting that you set up once and then create an export setting for

Cheers, Richard

 

[jwicaksana]

Hi Richard, yeah I saw that option too upon exporting, but the watermark I designed cannot fit there. Maybe I'll try something simpler like you do. 😀

 

[Chris101]

Other with explanation: I generally do not watermark pictures, cause I don't usually care if they get used without authorization. On the rare case that I post an image that is commercial in some way, I will watermark the online version, or make it deliberately small and with poor reproducibility.

 

[lynnb]

On an 800px image I use Verdana 14pt in the bottom RH corner with transparency as low as I can get it to minimise distraction from the picture, while still being legible. I add a drop shadow to the text if it needs that to be visible (e.g. white b/g).

The objective is to minimise and discourage unauthorised usage - however unlikely - and remind viewers that copyright is an important intellectual rights issue for all creative content generators. Widespread theft and social acceptance of theft makes it all the harder for the creators who rely on images to generate an income and support a family.

 

[burancap]

I don't care for them, but after these recent a7 threads -they should be mandatory!

 

[jackbaty]

I put a small mark in the lower right. That way the person using (or stealing) the image doesn't have to worry about attribution 🙂

I like maintaining credit for an image, regardless of its "quality". I'm not worried about theft. It's just a signature. A pompous, immature... oh whatever.

 

[colyn]

I have recently started marking my images for posting. I usually place a small mark at the bottom left or right.

 

[daveleo]

I am 90% switched over from a very intrusive "COPYRIGHT" to a subtle signature in a lower corner. I am now using a semi-transparent image of my (actual) signature on new pictures.

I don't mind giving prints away but it bothers me enormously when (if) someone would steal one - at least he will have to put the effort into erasing my signature !

 

[Bill Clark]

Other than my head shot portrait, sorry, I don't post photographs on line. My policy, since each client pays for full user rights, each client controls where the photographs gets placed for viewing. No logo or watermark on the photographs. I don't look for "that a boys," or thoughts on a photo or group of photos. Just sign the contract and I'm happy when the check clears through the system. The only person who helped me with my photography was Monte Zucker. I don't think I'll find a replacement coach but I'm looking.

Have a wonderful holiday season and my best to you in 2014.

 

[gunsmithing]

For the most part I do not use any watermark photos
Most of my work is drawing and charts I do to help others and will place my name and city in the bottom in very small print. With any good photoshop can remove the watermark.
So if it is good DO NOT UPLOAD it in a big file keep it small and in (CompuServe GIF)

Dave

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Before Flickr I was using Google albums and was adding little bug on upload from Picasa app. But Google is corrupting pictures now very badly.

I don't use it with Flickr, because if I post it outside it will have signature under.

Watermark is important tool for those who are buying their first DSRL and thinking it is all they need to run photography as business.
This is how crapshots with ugly huge logo appears at forums. You know, it always have "photography" word on it. 🙂

 

[Lauffray]

A notice in a lower corner takes only a second to be cropped out, just upload a lower resolution image and be mindful where you go (tumblr reblog ? pinterest ? no thanks)
That said for a professional, there are better ways to do it, check the way Panos displays pictures on their website, imho it's probably the best use of a watermark. For an enthusiast such as myself I find it a little pompous

 

[Frank Petronio]

It seems amateurish to this August Lady. Use metadata tags.

 

[Duane Pandorf]

I have my copyright info imbedded into my files. A sig can easily be photoshopped away. And depending on the sig, it could distract the viewer.

 

[taskoni]

I chose "other" because I don't bother with watermarking. I scan with a crappy scanner anyway and the photos I post are not good for any other use but for online share. I don't display online my favorite works.

Regards,

Boris

 

[BLKRCAT]

I see a lot of digital shooters adding watermarks. I find it really cheapens a shot.

 

[Lauffray]

Metadata and embedded info can be stripped out of the exported files by the way, I don't always trust what "optimization" is done server side after you upload something.

 

[Blooze]

I started with the usual sig in the corner watermark, then went to a watermark that covers about 70% of the photo, faded out in a dominant color of the photo, and clear over the main subject. That large one was very easy to do and I received good feedback on it, but I've decided that I'm never going to be a pro and none of my photos are really worth stealing anyway. Those photos are still out there on the interwebs, but if I have something I think is that good I don't post it anywhere but on my website. Even the stuff on my website isn't optimized for printing or the actual finished product. Metadata can be stripped easily in a couple of seconds, so that does absolutely nothing. I just don't post anything larger than about 800x1200 pixels online anymore.

The only way to keep your photos from being stolen is to not post them on the web and we all know that we like to share 😉