Watermark Positioning...
brandofamily
Registered Users Posts: 2,013 Major grins
What's better/ preferred... watermark in middle of pic (acroos the main subject) or watermark at top or bottom (not covering main subject)...I am trying to reduce theft, but still not detur sales...
0
Comments
Watermarking the top or bottom of the photo kind of defeats the purpose of watermarking. If someone can crop out the watermark and wind up with an image of the main subject, you have done yourself a disservice, IMHO.
Make your watermark large and transparent and it shouldn't deter sales while affording maximum protection for your images.
Steve
Ow. I had not thought of that, Steve. Now I really feel a need to make a change!
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
:s85
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
I've seen some watermarks that are so dark and take up so much of the image that I have a hard time appreciating the actual image itself.
It's because of those reasons that I created a very subtle watermark for my own images. In some of them, you don't even realize there is a watermark at first glance. My thought is that this way, people can enjoy the image, but if they decide to just copy it, my watermark is still there. And, yes, I have different "shades" of opacity for my watermark that I use depending on the image. Here are a couple of samples:
CWC Photography: “Painting pictures with cameras.” • Nature & Animals • Around the World • New York City • Miscellaneous • Sunsets • Central Park
i use an ugly bright watermark and have been complimented by some publishing comapnies as it is a real deterent for people ro steal the image
Save $5 on a new Smugmug Membership
Host your website for just $3.45/mo with JustHost - Rated best web host of 2010
See my profile for a gear list & more
I also set the largest size to Medium. This way, if they somehow end up with a copy of the image (which they can), it's small and will make a crappy 4x6 print.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
I think fewer people stealing images, steal them for prints. They want to use it as a desktop, or facebook image, or something else.
Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
~ Gear Pictures
Here is a recent example. I had a non-tiled before, but because of the difference in landscape and portrait it doesn't always prove effective.
Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
~ Gear Pictures
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
So, I don't image protect my photos. Those who do copy it to FB, MySpace etc. typically leave my watermark on. My watermark is my website address so those who copy and save it to the web are giving me free advertising and driving people back to my site to view more photos. I use a fairly large watermark with about 70% opacity at the bottom of my photos. It stretches from one side of the photo to the other. Typically prominent enough to ruin it as a print and discouraging cropping because important aspects of the photo would be chopped off.
I am open to a low opacity, moderately obtrusive centered watermark, but I tried it once and still wasn't comfortable with how it spoiled the effect of the photo.
I think it really depends on how possessive you want to be about your photos and how stringent you are about giving anything away for free. I want to sell photos and I do what I think are pretty decent, regular sales, but I also want people to have a very enjoyable experience if they simply want to view the photos online at my site. I suppose I can take this approach because selling photos is not how I earn a living. I'm in it for fun more than profit.
Jay
Here's what I came up with, for my Stock gallery. Watermark is at 50% opacity.