Camano Island Sunset

Rhuarc

Was out at Camano Island north of Seattle two weeks ago and got a few decent ones and just thought I'd share.

You can see the rest of the gallery here:
http://photos.wendellbeitzel.com/gallery/3491150/1/196702177

kdog

Wendell, your gallery of water marks has some beautiful backgrounds.

Regards,
-joel

toferbaseball

kdog wrote:

Wendell, your gallery of water marks has some beautiful backgrounds.

Regards,
-joel

good one!!

The Watermarks are a bit much if you want us to enjoy the photos ,,,

Rhuarc

Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I guess I could just make it smaller but keep it in the center of the image? I don't want to putit off to one side, you know the croppers out there! Lol

toferbaseball

Rhuarc wrote:

Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I guess I could just make it smaller but keep it in the center of the image? I don't want to putit off to one side, you know the croppers out there! Lol

You could always just use a smaller / lower res images to share if you are that concerned, but they are your images and I can understand.

Rhuarc

toferbaseball wrote:

You could always just use a smaller / lower res images to share if you are that concerned, but they are your images and I can understand.

I already have Larges and Originals disabled, as well as Right-Click Protection on, so I suppose it wouldn't hurt to make the watermark a bit small and less obtrusive! LoL

kdog

Rhuarc wrote:

I already have Larges and Originals disabled

Um, no you don't. And I can prove that by posting your image in its original size WITHOUT your watermark right here, if you like.

Cheers,
-joel

Rhuarc

kdog wrote:

Um, no you don't. And I can prove that by posting your image in its original size WITHOUT your watermark right here, if you like.

Cheers,
-joel

Hmm, is it still doing it? I realized that I had disabled Large, but not Original. I'm still working my way through my galleries and protecting them, but I'm pretty sure this gallery is the way I wanted it. If you are able to post a Large version without the watermark let me know and I'll try to figure out what is wrong.

Thanks for the heads up!

kdog

Looks like you've fixed it.

My own personal opinion would to confine watermarks to a corner where they're not so obvious on the smaller formats. I mean we go out of the way to clone out dust, do nice processing, and then splash a big watermark across the pic? Just doesn't make any sense to me. Who cares if somebody steals a web-sized image from your site and crops the watermark in the corner out. How does that hurt you? Only you have the original, so it's not like somebody can make prints from a small image. I think you gain much more benefit as a photographer by getting your work out there in as user-friendly a format as possible. But that's just me.

Cheers,
-joel

Rhuarc

kdog wrote:

Looks like you've fixed it.

My own personal opinion would to confine watermarks to a corner where they're not so obvious on the smaller formats. I mean we go out of the way to clone out dust, do nice processing, and then splash a big watermark across the pic? Just doesn't make any sense to me. Who cares if somebody steals a web-sized image from your site and crops the watermark in the corner out. How does that hurt you? Only you have the original, so it's not like somebody can make prints from a small image. I think you gain much more benefit as a photographer by getting your work out there in as user-friendly a format as possible. But that's just me.

Cheers,
-joel

That's a very good point, and something I hadn't thought about before. I'll have to come up with some different options and have you take a look at them for me!

LiquidOps

kdog wrote:

Looks like you've fixed it.

My own personal opinion would to confine watermarks to a corner where they're not so obvious on the smaller formats. I mean we go out of the way to clone out dust, do nice processing, and then splash a big watermark across the pic? Just doesn't make any sense to me. Who cares if somebody steals a web-sized image from your site and crops the watermark in the corner out. How does that hurt you? Only you have the original, so it's not like somebody can make prints from a small image. I think you gain much more benefit as a photographer by getting your work out there in as user-friendly a format as possible. But that's just me.

Cheers,
-joel

*I'm not trying to start an argument here or anything, but I've seen a lot of complaints about people's watermarks lately, so I feel I need to speak up.*

I care! I agree it's sad, but it's how the world is today. People will steal anything that can get their hands on. Including our images that we devote so much time to take and PP. I don't want someone stealing my image. You asked "How does that hurt you?" Well... that's a great question... I think that hurts me very much.

I've put in all this hard work into an image... spent many hours on thought and processing to capture the image just right. Some crook comes along, grabs my image and decides to use it on his website. Cropping out my "little watermark in the corner". This hurts me because of a couple reasons. One reason being it shows my work is not respected (Granted i'm flattered that someone wants to use my image) and just taken. The other reason is, since my image is so easily accessible (a quick 2 minute crop to remove a watermark) i've now lost out on a potential sale. The image is now being used on someones website with no reference what so ever back to me.

My final thoughts on this are... If we're spending so much time and effort into taking these wonderful images, then we should take just as much, if not more effort, to protect them.

Sorry... end of my rant....

I say... Keep the obtrusive watermarks. Protect your art, protect your work, and most importantly protect your time.

Steven

kdog

Nice rant.

But what's really ironic is that your own website contains a nice discreet, flat, small-font, watermark across the bottom of your image. So even though you chose to dump on my post, your own choices show that you actually agree with me. Your watermark does not impede ones ability to view your images. Sure, I said "corner", and yours are across the bottom of the image. However, from a cropping standpoint, the two locations are virtually equivalent. Wendell on the other hand has a huge raised watermark smack across the center of the image which makes it tough to evaluate the image. I think most people would just move on -- which is probably why this thread has so many views and yet not a single person besides me has actually commented on his pictures.

Regarding losing a sale because somebody stole your small web image and cropped out your watermark -- ridiculous. You're dreaming if you think the thief would have paid for the image instead. A thief is a thief. If they can't steal your image, they'll find somebody else's to steal. In fact, you probably stand a higher chance at receiving revenue from the thief because you can contact them and demand payment. If the person designed a website around your image they may be willing at that point to purchase the image rather than start over.

Of course, you guys use Smugmug which already has theft protection features built-in by disabling right-click. You'll notice Andy's website has no watermarks at all, even on his "images for sale" galleries. Enough said there.

Finally, you'll notice my original post said "In my opinion". You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I am entitled to mine. So there's no need to get so huffy, especially when it's clear through your own choices that you actually agree with me.

Regards,
-joel

LiquidOps

kdog wrote:

Nice rant.

But what's really ironic is that your own website contains a nice discreet, flat, small-font, watermark across the bottom of your image. So even though you chose to dump on my post, your own choices show that you actually agree with me. Your watermark does not impede ones ability to view your images. Sure, I said "corner", and yours are across the bottom of the image. However, from a cropping standpoint, the two locations are virtually equivalent. Wendell on the other hand has a huge raised watermark smack across the center of the image which makes it tough to evaluate the image. I think most people would just move on -- which is probably why this thread has so many views and yet not a single person besides me has actually commented on his pictures.

Regarding losing a sale because somebody stole your small web image and cropped out your watermark -- ridiculous. You're dreaming if you think the thief would have paid for the image instead. A thief is a thief. If they can't steal your image, they'll find somebody else's to steal. In fact, you probably stand a higher chance at receiving revenue from the thief because you can contact them and demand payment. If the person designed a website around your image they may be willing at that point to purchase the image rather than start over.

Of course, you guys use Smugmug which already has theft protection features built-in by disabling right-click. You'll notice Andy's website has no watermarks at all, even on his "images for sale" galleries. Enough said there.

Finally, you'll notice my original post said "In my opinion". You are entitled to your opinion just as much as I am entitled to mine. So there's no need to get so huffy, especially when it's clear through your own choices that you actually agree with me.

Regards,
-joel

By no means do I want this to get ugly or go beyond where its already gone. Other than quoting your thread, I was by no means singling you out. I believe I made references to "I've seen this around a lot lately".

I was by no means trying to attack you. My apologies if it came across that way.

While I have not created my watermarks to cover the entire image, is neither agreeing with you or disagreeing. To be perfectly honest, it is pure laziness on my part of not going through everything and changing it.

The images that I do have set for sale though, are fully covered with watermarks and protected with both password protected galleries and all the other fancy SM features. (these are for specific clients)

Again... never once was my intent to attack you or single you out. Just making an observation...

On another topic... you're in AZ... when we gonna get together and shoot?

Steven

kdog

No worries, Stephen. I'm always up for a good enthusiastic debate. Nothing personal at all, and I apologize if I came across otherwise as well.

Would love to do a shoot somewhere in AZ. Sedona is centrally located.

We should take this to the western-shoots thread though.

Cheers,
-joel

Rhuarc

So in response to some ideas about watermarks I edited the above pictures in this thread so that you can more easily view the pictures! Thanks for the input kdog!!

kdog

There you go! Well done!

And hey, nice pics!!!

Cheers,
-joel