Watermarking your Web Images - Do you do that - and why?

[William W]

Comments and subsequent conversation on this thread m (http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?97929-A-very-interesting-situation&p=974164#post974164)ade meponder – how many Photographers (still) watermark their images for internetdisplay?

I am particularly interested in W&P Professional Photographers – but even though this is posted in the Business Section (assuming double posting is not allowed) - I purposely posted an open question to garner a wide range of comment and opinion and from those who shoot and post not-for-profit/sale images, also.

WW

[Speedway]

I was shooting a race meeting about 2 years ago and my son overheard a person telling another who had just purchased some photos from me "Dont buy them if you want any I can download them from his site, remove the name and print them for free. I was going to have a go at him but that would have been counter productive as he was a member of the club. When I got home I redid watermarks on all the shots on the website, all shots are more heavily watermarked and I have since sold shots to the same person. I use a transparent watermark across the main subject on all my shots and no one has said anything negative about them. One club uses them with permission on their own website. See attached sample photo.
Keith.


84604

[matt shepherd]

William I do water mark but to be honest it is not for people that want to copy and print images from the web as I only ever upload low res images so they look good on screen but if someone wanted to print them they would look terrible.
So the main reason I put a small non intrusive water mark on images is so if people share or send my image around there is still some kind of link back to my business name.. This is pretty much just for Facebook as I don't water mark any image on my website as they are not usually shared as much as they are on the Facebook page.

This is my example of how I watermark.

[William W]

. . .So the main reason I put a small non intrusive water mark on images is so if people share or send my image around there is still some kind of link back to my business name.. This is pretty much just for Facebook as I don't water mark any image on my website as they are not usually shared as much as they are on the Facebook page.This is my example of how I watermark.
Thank you.
For clarity I was NOT thinking of your example as an example "a watermark" in the context of the Original Post - I would term yours as more the artist's signature.Yes I understand - Low Res, Looks Good but if knocked off - Prints Poorly.

***


. . .I use a transparent watermark across the main subject on all my shots and no one has said anything negative about them. One club uses them with permission on their own website. See attached sample photo.Keith.
Thank you.
It is clear to me now I should have been more precise as to the definition of "watermark".
Your example is more the style watermarking I mean - certainly large and across the centre of the image.

WW

[Longshots]

Matt - its worth pointing out that not many people would be either interested or informed about downloading and printing your image - the reality is that if it looks good on the monitor, most abuse now happens when people use and abuse your intellectual property in similar situations - ie ONLINE. So be very wary of thinking that youre safe because its just a low res image. Sadly most abuses now seem to be online to online, as opposed to people trying to actually print them out.

William - to answer you as helpfully as possible - I would consider it sensible advice that if you're in business, that you should ensure that in certain situations if you're uploading to various places (Facebook and other social media places), that its good practice to watermark your images. To specifically answer you my W&P colleagues (in the very large majority) always watermark. Its just simple common sense and it doesnt take too long to do it. Sure it can be removed, as a locked door can be broken down or picked - why not protect your asset?

[matt shepherd]

Matt - its worth pointing out that not many people would be either interested or informed about downloading and printing your image - the reality is that if it looks good on the monitor, most abuse now happens when people use and abuse your intellectual property in similar situations - ie ONLINE. So be very wary of thinking that youre safe because its just a low res image. Sadly most abuses now seem to be online to online, as opposed to people trying to actually print them out.

William - to answer you as helpfully as possible - I would consider it sensible advice that if you're in business, that you should ensure that in certain situations if you're uploading to various places (Facebook and other social media places), that its good practice to watermark your images. To specifically answer you my W&P colleagues (in the very large majority) always watermark. Its just simple common sense and it doesnt take too long to do it. Sure it can be removed, as a locked door can be broken down or picked - why not protect your asset?

That is a good point but at the end of the day your image is still being shared and some may see that in a bad way but the way I see it is that more people are actually seeing my images and they still have my name on them so if they wanted to see more or purchase prints they can find me. But I can see were you are coming from in the way that someone could use images for there own personal gain ie advertising etc. But that is very hard to stop unless you put a big water mark right through the image and I am not willing to do that as i feel it takes to much away from the image.

[William W]

- to answer you as helpfully as possible . . . if you're in business, [ . . ] you should ensure that in certain situations if you're uploading to various places (Facebook and other social media places), that its good practice to watermark your images. To specifically answer you my W&P colleagues (in the very large majority) always watermark. . .

Thank you.

To clarify your answer in my mind:
Your W&P Colleagues watermark all work which is uploaded to the internet or they only watermark images which are uploaded to Facebook and Social Media sites?
And - your W&P Colleagues, in the main, use facebook and other social media sites as a marketing stream?

[Watermarking is] just simple common sense and it doesn’t take too long to do it. Sure it can be removed, as a locked door can be broken down or picked - why not protect your asset?



That's why I posed the question for discussion:
I am not of the opinion that it is fait accompli - "common sense" - but indeed clarification by answering the two follow-up questions has bearing on particular circumstances and the addressing of same.



WW

[Speedway]

An image that looks good on screen will print up ok at 6X4 which is my main seller to drivers and familys at the track. My online sales are larger prints 8X12 & 12X18. Over the years I have seen a few people with thousands of dollars of race car but have photos coppied off the net with badly removed watermarks to hand out in the pits after the races. I have also been asked to scan, copy and remove watermarks from photos. when I asked why was told they thought $30 was too dear for the photo I told them it would cost them $50 dollars to do what they wanted plus $30 for the print but I wouldn't do it anyway, they walked away muttering to themselves.
Keith.

[matt shepherd]

An image that looks good on screen will print up ok at 6X4 which is my main seller to drivers and familys at the track. My online sales are larger prints 8X12 & 12X18. Over the years I have seen a few people with thousands of dollars of race car but have photos coppied off the net with badly removed watermarks to hand out in the pits after the races. I have also been asked to scan, copy and remove watermarks from photos. when I asked why was told they thought $30 was too dear for the photo I told them it would cost them $50 dollars to do what they wanted plus $30 for the print but I wouldn't do it anyway, they walked away muttering to themselves.
Keith.

Yeah I understand were you are coming from. Isn't it unbelievable how people wont pay $30 for an image but will spend so much time trying to get around paying for it.

[Tommo224]

I haven't reached the point of selling individual images yet, but I do know that when I'll be putting them up, I'll have a big fat watermark across it like displayed above.

However, the photos I do now are the same as Matt Shepherd. Just in the corner and low res web sized images.

[MiniFighter]

I do it cause it looks cool :cool:



Wayne.

[William]

I decided to watermark mine , To try and stop the majority of honest thieves , I ones that may think twice if they see the Copyright symbol , Wont stop all , But will make a few think, I hope !!

[jeffde]

I recently posted about a dozen photos from a wedding on FB with a watermark across the bottom - the bridesmaid copied them cropped the watermark off and reposted them in her album - when i pointed out (nicely) that she was breaching copyright and a contract i had with the bride and groom - she reposted the originals. - In the main i think it was ignorance - more than an effort to make them appear to be hers - after all she was un some of them ...

Unfortunately many people just don't realise (or care) that its theft - and a little watermark at the bottom really doesn't protect you alot - people crop and don't really care about the effect that that has on the image.

[Speedway]

Unfortunately many people just don't realise (or care) that its theft - and a little watermark at the bottom really doesn't protect you alot - people crop and don't really care about the effect that that has on the image.

Precisely why I changed my watermark to the one above.
Keith.

[Speedway]

Ipstar have been playing around with the satellite causing dropouts and hiccuus and I thought this haden't uploaded so you can remove this one.
Keith.

[William]

Bit of a balancing act really , I just want to stop the honest thieves with a reminder Watermark, Keiths should stop them You'd reckon, You can always do an Image search for stolen images using "Tineye" https://www.tineye.com/login If your really worried about theft - Bill

[ricktas]

I do. People will find ways to steal them if they really want to. But my watermark is also about marketing. It gets your name seen.

[Erin]

I usually fuss around with my images to make sure they can't really be blown up or printed without looking like crap. My watermark is fairly subtle as I really don't like the big obnoxious ones. I'd rather see the image as it's meant to be seen without text getting in the way and tend to move on fairly quickly from those images. It's a double-edged sword.

[Grantley]

After seeing some of my images used in a commercial application and another reproduced on a mouse pad without so much as a courtesy request I now whack a copyright watermark right across the middle of all shots.
Sharing is one thing, but helping yourself to anothers work is something else again.
Cheers
Grant

[s1l3nt]

Personally, i have only really posted my photos here and on facebook which is only shared with my family and friends. So i havnt watermarked those images. However, if i was publishing them online, etc. I would watermark them for sure, it serves two purposes in my opinion. The first being to help protect images from being stolen/used without permission, and secondly it can help get your name "out there" or atleast into the viewers mind. Just my opinion :)

[teylward]

I try not to take away from the images by placing a watermark across the middle of the image, but I try put it off to the side where if someone did try cropping it off the image wouldn't look right (eg. cutting off tyres, wheels, heads, legs, etc.) I know people can still copy and paste and edit to get rid of the watermark, but nothing is 100% safe if someone wants it bad enough. If the image was an absolute perfect image, then I would be more inclined to watermark straight across the picture.
I do photography as a hobby, but may earn a little bit of money off of it one day.

[SamNabz]

Since you are now selling your images via your website, I think you should definitely place a large watermark on the images you have for sale not only on your website, but anywhere else you advertise/publish them, such as; Facebook, Twitter etc.

With the watermark being slightly transparent, site visitors and potential buyers are still able to view the entire image; however, if they were to save/steal/screenie the image, they will be stuck with a nice big watermark through a majority of it.

Placing a small watermark in the bottom corners of your images is not going to do much, if anything at all, as it can simply be cropped out.

[reaction]

Personally, i have only really posted my photos here and on facebook which is only shared with my family and friends.

You realise anything on fb is owned by fb and can be used/sold by fb and any of its partners? Unless they've changed their T&C.

[Kym]

As an aside, AP protects member images, at least as much as we reasonably can on the web.

Specifically:

Attachments and Competition entries can only be viewed by logged in active members.
The Gallery is only available to active members with 50 posts and 30 days membership, but members can hot link from the gallery if they wish.
The front page comp winners are reduced size and quality.
The anti-spammer technical measures stop more than 100 'bot registration attempts a day.


Also AP recognises and licenses your provided content, See: gen [25] .. [28]

And finally there is the privacy policy... http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showlibrary.php?title=Ausphotography_Privacy_Policy

[Wayne]

I don't often post anything, and when I do if it is just from my personal pile of pics, I usually don't watermark, but I never upload in anything but low resolution.
If it was from a paid shoot, my government clients own © anyway by default so they never leave my PC via any means other than a disc to the client and non-govt client images are only ever uploaded to my secure galleries, and they are also low resolution and watermarked.

[s1l3nt]

You realise anything on fb is owned by fb and can be used/sold by fb and any of its partners? Unless they've changed their T&C.

Touche... Funny thing is, i did a paper on this at uni yet still didnt think about it when posting my pictures. Haha :scrtch: The low resolution that it goes onto facebook as, they wouldnt bother with it. Plus the photos on facebook, are mainly for my progression and to compare my skills, etc, for myself. Or photos of family get togethers. Not much use to facebook as far as im concerned :th3:

[reaction]

Touche... Funny thing is, i did a paper on this at uni yet still didnt think about it when posting my pictures. Haha :scrtch: The low resolution that it goes onto facebook as, they wouldnt bother with it. Plus the photos on facebook, are mainly for my progression and to compare my skills, etc, for myself. Or photos of family get togethers. Not much use to facebook as far as im concerned :th3:

It's never what you think they may use stuff for, but what you can't imagine they may use for that bothers me. My thinking is, if someone in one of your photos had a stalker, would you be happy for that stalker to have access to the photo/info you post? I find that's the easiest way to consider it.