One Watermark for both Dark and Light images?

BradfordBenn

Hello All-

So I am trying to figure out a single watermark that I can use for both dark and light images. I was thinking of either just using Illustrator and doing a black outline around white filled text. But I am not quite able to get the look I am going for.

I then thought about perhaps doing an outer glow effect. Still not sure it is right, so I figured I would ask:

Has anyone had success using a single watermark for all images? Any hints or suggestions? I did a search and I was either not selecting the right search terms or am thinking about it the wrong way.

Art Scott

I use a multi-colored wave watermark.....seems to work decently of light and dark images.

Dogdots

I use this one. You can vary the lightness or darkness of it. For me its worked both on light and dark images as you can see on the bottom and middle of the photo. I have this on all my photos on my site right now.

BradfordBenn

Thanks for the ideas. Time to fire up illustrator.

Art Scott

BradfordBenn wrote:

Thanks for the ideas. Time to fire up illustrator.

did mine in PS CS as I do not have that fancy smancy software:D:D:D winkrofl

Dogdots

Did mine in CS3 - just a few steps and "all done"

jogle

Create one with light text and then use a drop shadow, you can then fade it to about 50%

The light text will show up on a dark image



And the drop shadow will outline it on a bright image.



Here's the png image I use (scaled down)

BradfordBenn

Thanks. Still working on it.... I have a hunch it is going to be a few day process.

Dogdots

BradfordBenn wrote:

Thanks. Still working on it.... I have a hunch it is going to be a few day process.

Take your time -- looking forward to seeing it when it's done

BradfordBenn

I think I got it
So I used Illustrator as I am more fluent in the way it handles text than I am in Photoshop. What I did was draw diagonal lines in a cropped area of 3000 pixels by 4000 pixels. I then attached text to the lines (paths) and turned off the line from showing. I then did one line with a drop shadow as suggested, and the other as a outer glow. I then imported a few pictures into Illustrator on different layers and turned them on and off until I found something I liked.

So without further adieu (these were picked to show how it works on many formats - the pictures have gotten better, these are the test ones I used)

#1


#2


#3


I am waiting for people to come back and say, "Something is wrong with your pictures, there is a line through them."

Dogdots

Hmmmmm....I like, but then again I don't. As a viewer its a little distracting, but as a person who doesn't want their images stolen and printed I like it. Although the lines with your words would be easy to clone out since they are so narrow. It really is a hard thing to figure out what to do

denisegoldberg

Honestly? I find the text on the crossed lines to disturb the viewing of your photos. I find it distracting enough that I wouldn't spend any time looking at your photos. If that's what you are trying to accomplish, I believe that you've succeeded.

In some markets it makes sense to splash a strong or distracting watermark across the photo because you expect some degree of grabbing of photos by your target audience. One example might be (school) sports photos that participants might grab to place on a site like facebook. What is your market?

--- Denise

BradfordBenn

I have had a few of my pictures swiped for PR use without me knowing. As well as people posting them on Facebook, MySpace... etc. Thanks for the comments, I think I might have to do some more tests and thinking.

Thank you one and all for the comments. I am trying to find the right mix between not easy to clone out, not easy to crop out, and easy to find, so it works on both Dark and Light.

Hmmmm.

Dogdots

BradfordBenn wrote:

I have had a few of my pictures swiped for PR use without me knowing. As well as people posting them on Facebook, MySpace... etc. Thanks for the comments, I think I might have to do some more tests and thinking.

Thank you one and all for the comments. I am trying to find the right mix between not easy to clone out, not easy to crop out, and easy to find, so it works on both Dark and Light.

Hmmmm.

I'm sorry to hear that has happened to you. It would really bother me if I found out someone did that with any of my photos.

Let me know when you find something that works

ivar

Dogdots wrote:

Let me know when you find something that works

I never know what to do with watermarks, as far as size/shape... you want big and obnoxious for safety, but you want small for viewing pleasure...


I do know that white(ish) text with dropshadow works for both light and dark shots:





I've actually made the watermark large and square. In SmugMug I have it positioned 'bottom right' so it works for both portrait and landscape oriented styles.

Dogdots

First I have to say I really like your 2nd photo

Watermarks really bother me only because I can't find one that's "IT" for all things. The ones you have here are perfect for no intrusion into visually looking at your photos. They could even be bigger in my opinion so the person can read your name alittle better.

Is there a way you can put a big fat watermark design in the center of your photo....really light so if someone were to print it out it would print bold and ugly

For now I'm sticking with my light line across my photos with my name inside of it.

How would your cross hatch watermark look like if you lightened it? It might not be so "there", but you could still see the photo and if someone were to steal it....print it ... well then it would show up.

BradfordBenn

It is a conundrum isn't it.

I like both the pictures and the watermark suggestions Ivar, however I am concerned that a small corner one like that would be too easily cropped out.

But I can tell you that today, it did work. The watermark made one of the people "borrowing" my images contact me today (Internal at work). He was very surprised that he could not right click to copy it, then he was surprised that doing a screen capture the watermark was still there. So he had to contact me

I talked with him about what he needed and why, I then asked him for the photo he wanted. I then did an owner save, resized it to 1024x768 and 72dpi (screen resolution/export for web) and sent them over. With a much smaller watermark included in the images, much subtler.

Matt336

Here is what I use for my photos that I plan to sell. It works great.





It's transparent enough that you can see through it but it still gives me credit.

kdog

ivar wrote:

I do know that white(ish) text with dropshadow works for both light and dark shots:
...
I've actually made the watermark large and square. In SmugMug I have it positioned 'bottom right' so it works for both portrait and landscape oriented styles.

Taking a cue from Ivar and Jogle who both mentioned the light text with drop shadow, I took a crack at this last night. Here are the results:



BTW, a couple of things I figured out that are wrong in the Smugmug tutorial are as follows:

1) Don't set the transparency of the text in Photoshop. Smugmug has its own watermark transparency slider.

2) Don't make the watermark big. The tutorial uses an example of 1600x200. Jogle uses 1000x1000, and he said this was reduced in size! Ivar says he made it big as well, if I understood him correctly. Instead, I recommend sizing your watermark image just large enough to house your text, plus a little padding to space it off the edge. That way you can use the Smugmug positioning feature to put the same watermark in different locations.

Regards,
-joel

ivar

kdog wrote:

2) Don't make the watermark big. The tutorial uses an example of 1600x200. Jogle uses 1000x1000, and he said this was reduced in size! Ivar says he made it big as well, if I understood him correctly. Instead, I recommend sizing your watermark image just large enough to house your text, plus a little padding to space it off the edge. That way you can use the Smugmug positioning feature to put the same watermark in different locations.

the positioning ability is indeed lost when using a large watermark, unfortunately. However I purposely did make my watermark big; I just checked and it's actually 1750x1750 pixels. The reason behind this is that it scales down automatically on smaller images.

This is my watermark (small):

Let's say that you have a watermark that is 200px wide and 400px long.
On an image that comes straight from your SLR, the watermark will then be a relatively small watermark in the corner. If you apply the same watermark to an image that is already downsized prior to upload it's going to be a lot bigger, relatively.
Let's say you apply the same watermark to an image that is 800px wide and about 570px high. Now, the watermark will be relatively large and cover half the width of the image.

Big or small, it's not a problem either way. It's just my personal preference.

kdog

ivar wrote:

Let's say that you have a watermark that is 200px wide and 400px long.
On an image that comes straight from your SLR, the watermark will then be a relatively small watermark in the corner. If you apply the same watermark to an image that is already downsized prior to upload it's going to be a lot bigger, relatively.

Ok, I hear what you're saying, but that's not what I'm seeing. My watermark is 341 pixels wide. I watermarked an image that was sized at 800 pixels. Interestingly it comes out the same size as my original watermark, and the same size as the watermark on a smugmug 'L' size (also 800 pixels) of a full-size image. It's the correct size. What's interesting is that for larger Smugmug sizes, it's up-sizing my watermark so that it looks right there as well. So evidently there's some very clever watermark resizing heuristics going on behind the scenes in Smugmug.

Dogdots

kdog wrote:

Ok, I hear what you're saying, but that's not what I'm seeing. My watermark is 341 pixels wide. I watermarked an image that was sized at 800 pixels. Interestingly it comes out the same size as my original watermark, and the same size as the watermark on a smugmug 'L' size (also 800 pixels) of a full-size image. It's the correct size. What's interesting is that for larger Smugmug sizes, it's up-sizing my watermark so that it looks right there as well. So evidently there's some very clever watermark resizing heuristics going on behind the scenes in Smugmug.

I find this interesting. I use to make my watermark by following the tutorial on smug. Its different sizes on the different sizes of my photos. I don't like that, but that's how it works.

Now I make my own size and it still comes out different sizes on my different sized photos on smug

Matt -- I really like your watermark I'm going to try that out on mine. What opacity was your's set at? Did you set it yourself or do it through smug after uploading your photos?

Toshido

Oh oh, my turn



Used a program called Visual watermark to resize all my photos, I believe 600 pixels on the long side. Then apply the watermark to top and bottom as seen.

Only use watermarks on pictures I expect to be stolen and used without permission. So my goal is a little different. I am hoping people will leave the watermarks alone and spread the pictures around and people can see where the original came from.

BradfordBenn

Just as soon as I think I have solution, someone posits a new idea. Thanks!

goldenstarphoto

[quote

Only use watermarks on pictures I expect to be stolen and used without permission. So my goal is a little different. I am hoping people will leave the watermarks alone and spread the pictures around and people can see where the original came from.[/quote]

Free advertising-great idea!

seth

ivar wrote:

the positioning ability is indeed lost when using a large watermark, unfortunately. However I purposely did make my watermark big; I just checked and it's actually 1750x1750 pixels.

what size font is the text (in the 1750x1750 version)? thanks.