Website Image Protection

Aaron Jors

I am currently in the process of creating a website and just wanted some feedback in regards to image protection. My current plan is to display images that are 1024 W or 768 H for the largest dimension at 300 dpi. This size will make the images relatively useless for print.

My main concern is that at the above size these images are still useful for people to save to there computer or take and use on another site. I do not have the ability to stop the right click and my only other solution is to watermark the images.

My concern with this is that it somewhat ruins the viewers experience have the watermark in the center of the picture. I am being overly concerned about the images being used somewhere else on the internet or is a watermark the way to go.

Any input would be appreciated. Thanks, Aaron.

bham

I took a look at your site and since it is a smugmug site but you say you don't have the ability to right click protect the images, then you must not have a pro account. My recommendation is to bit the bullet and get the pro account for this protection, and to watermark.

See this thread here about what has happened to others who didn't watermark aggressively. http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=62279

claudermilk

I think most of us with Pro accounts have both the right-click protection (really just a little speed bump) active, AND watermarking active. Keeping the images small and watermarking them is your best defense. Oh, and turning off access to Originals. BTW, the DPI setting is essentially meaningless.

bham

Yes everything on the computer screen is displayed at 72dpi. So if you want an image to display at 2 inches by 2 inches, then 144x144 is the size.

aerialphoto

Aaron Jors wrote:

My current plan is to display images that are 1024 W or 768 H for the largest dimension at 300 dpi.

First off, don't sweat the DPI. 1024x768 at 300dpi will look the same to your viewers as an image at 1024x768 at 3000dpi, or a 1024x768 at 30dpi. If you're using smugmug just let it resize the images and save yourself the worry.

My main concern is that at the above size these images are still useful for people to save to there computer...My concern with this is that it somewhat ruins the viewers experience have the watermark in the center of the picture.

Good concerns. As has been said, get a pro account, turn on image protection, and set up watermarking. The right-click protection does nothing but turn away the neophyte internet users. If the image is on their screen then it's already in their computer. Period. They just need to know where to find it to use it.

That leaves watermarking, and your second concern. Watermarking doesn't mean you need to have solid white letters or symbols obstructing the image. You just need enough of a watermark to make it difficult (hopefully impossible) for the viewer to be able to remove the mark and use the image without your consent. My watermarks put a solid copyright notice in the corner of the image (along with my website address), and a "copyrighted image" notice faded across the middle. Hopefully its enough to cause a theif headache, but not enough to make people walk away from the image.

For images I might be interested in selling, or at least printing I just upload the image, apply the watermark, and I'm done. Simple.

Here's an example of my faded watermark on a printable image:

Aaron Jors

Thanks everyone for you input. I was really misunderstanding the whole dpi, resolution, web thing. I still have a couple questions though.

1. I have a post on another forum where some people have said 1024x768 is to large of an image to display and 800x600 would be more suitable. My question is if I use a watermark what does the size matter?

2. I currently have a slideshow on my homepage and would really hate to have watermark on those images is there anything I can do for the slideshow other than a watermark?

Thanks everyone!

Aaron Jors

Anyone?

claudermilk

I usually try to keep my online images to about 800x600 max. Watermarking does help a lot & makes the size less relevant.

While there's definitely a fair share of blowhards over there, there's also a lot of knowledgeable folks at FM. I remember when it was more like over here.