Are these watermarks obnoxious?

Markjay · March 6, 2008

I am still struggling with the watermarking issue for myself.
Originally, I had watermarks VERY similar to what Andy Williams has on his site but, they were too intrusive for my taste after viewing the images myself as a client would see it.

Then I went to the current watermarks which ARE transparent but, VERY visible on the images. But still, the images (in my mind) are very visible but don't totally obstruct the view of the subjects in most cases.

However, I would REALLY appreciate feedback from this community on how YOU view / rate the watermark I am currently using on my images as I'm trying to find that combination of keeping someone from taking a screenshot of my photo for keeps and, still allowing the viewers to see my photos in a way that they are still appealing. I do realize this can be a "personal thing"
but, YOUR personal opinion counts here! :-)

http://360photostock.com is where you'll see the watermarks

Thank you in advance for lending your opinions and feedback....
without which I'll be left right where I am, wondering how this is working visually.

DonRicklin · March 6, 2008

Two things. A live link to 360photostock.com as in 360photostock.com would help. And yes they are a bit over much. Like mine.

But I'm not selling, yet.

Don

Markjay · March 6, 2008

Shrink them?
So you don't have a problem with the watermarks, you have a problem with the SIZE of the watermarks, yes?

LRmvcDonR wrote:

Two things. A live link to 360photostock.com as in 360photostock.com would help. And yes they are a bit over much. Like mine. But I'm not selling, yet.

Don

DonRicklin · March 6, 2008

Or less opaque and you can vary the position, just creat a number form the same image with different positions.

Apply occordingly for the image content.
DAISNAID!

Still coming to this, myself, as I said.
Don

Markjay · March 6, 2008

Thank you, any more?
Thank you for your feedback... sure wish a few more would "chime in" but, it's a busy world out there :-)

I'll start playing with smaller version / less opaque and see what I come up with, maybe one less noticeable but, in three positions on the photo... we'll see.

Thanks again.

LRmvcDonR wrote:

Or less opaque and you can vary the position, just creat a number form the same image with different positions.

Apply occordingly for the image content.
DAISNAID! Still coming to this, myself, as I said.
Don

DonRicklin · March 6, 2008

Markjay wrote:

Thank you for your feedback... sure wish a few more would "chime in" but, it's a busy world out there :-)

I'll start playing with smaller version / less opaque and see what I come up with, maybe one less noticeable but, in three positions on the photo... we'll see.

Thanks again.

But only applied in one position for a given image.

Don

bham · March 7, 2008

I don't think so.

claudermilk · March 7, 2008

If it were ine, I'd make it a bit less opaque. But otherwise not too bad, it certainly is effective. No way to get rid of it without ruining the image or investing so much time you're better off just paying for it & being legal.

Markjay · March 7, 2008

Good feedback, appreciated!
Thank all of you (so far) who have taken a moment to look and lend an opinion on the watermark effectiveness vs. image viewing.

Think I'll leave it as is but, change it's opacity on some of the images and leave it as is on other images because on some of them more, they watermark is barely visible.

claudermilk wrote:

If it were ine, I'd make it a bit less opaque. But otherwise not too bad, it certainly is effective. No way to get rid of it without ruining the image or investing so much time you're better off just paying for it & being legal.

Markjay · March 7, 2008

As for effective
I made my watermark the way it is primarily to avoid idiots trying to get around the R click protection by simply doing a screen capture of the image.
With a prominent watermark (albeit transparent enough not to degrade) you can screen capture all you want.... you're still going to have my watermark on the image in a way that will force you to go out of your way to "clone out" the watermark... if it's that important to someone.

Important to someone: like the time someone in Japan stole one of my images off of a contest site I posted in, then uploaded MY image to another photo contest in JAPAN, posting the image as his (he being the creator).

Well, eventually someone (from Japan) who knew of my work, recognized the photo as mine and.... that thief was shamed by that community of his theft of my image and posing it as his own work.

Doesn't happen often (that I'm aware of) but, surely don't want to encourage these types of behavior. Not that my images are so great that they are in such high demand mind you :-) Here's part of a post on Dgrin where an non watermarked photo was stolen and used without permission.

So as I understand it he made a screen capture to circumvent the protections set up on the site, then intended to use the image in a show program.

claudermilk wrote:

If it were ine, I'd make it a bit less opaque. But otherwise not too bad, it certainly is effective. No way to get rid of it without ruining the image or investing so much time you're better off just paying for it & being legal.

MichaelKirk · March 7, 2008

Not a bad design, may want to try it a bit smaller and not on the left side.
I did a quick test on your website viewing different images and noticed the first thing I was drawn to was your watermark - not a good thing as it has become your images focal point.

Note that people read (hopefully) from left to right so it might be just as simple moving the WM to the right side.

By the way I love your home page "cubes" pretty cool!

Just a thought,
Michael

gus · March 7, 2008

Just had a quick look at your site...im fine with them as i just saw them now. Actually i think as water marks go, they are rather nice.

Just my 2 bob's worth.

Markjay · March 7, 2008

Great points!
VERY good points! Thank you for taking the time to peek and speak!

MichaelKirk wrote:

Not a bad design, may want to try it a bit smaller and not on the left side.
I did a quick test on your website viewing different images and noticed the first thing I was drawn to was your watermark - not a good thing as it has become your images focal point.

Note that people read (hopefully) from left to right so it might be just as simple moving the WM to the right side.

By the way I love your home page "cubes" pretty cool!

Just a thought,
Michael

Markjay · March 7, 2008

Location of watermark
I hadn't even thought of that but... you are absolutely right, the right side is more appealing than the left side and likely for the very reason you mention.

I'm also going to shrink the size of the watermark a tad as it is currently grabbing a great deal of attention (not totally a bad thing BTW). So right side bottom, shrink the watermark to a more visually manageable size and I think I've found the right "comfort zone" for my watermarks.

Thank you for your excellent feedback which has inspired me to improve on the watermark in a big way.

MichaelKirk wrote:

Not a bad design, may want to try it a bit smaller and not on the left side.
I did a quick test on your website viewing different images and noticed the first thing I was drawn to was your watermark - not a good thing as it has become your images focal point.

Note that people read (hopefully) from left to right so it might be just as simple moving the WM to the right side.

By the way I love your home page "cubes" pretty cool!

Just a thought,
Michael

MichaelKirk · March 7, 2008

No problem
That is exactly what these forums are for.
I just redesigne mine so I have all this watermark info fresh in my head. I did a lot of researching and looking at others to see what appealed to me as well as offered the amount of protection I was comfortable with.

Here area copies of my new watermarks that I am now using:

This watermark is for all photos listed in my galleries - I'm still torn if I want to make this one just a bit bigger or leave it alone...I will probably just leave it:

...and this one for posting samples in forums for critiques, etc as well as will use this one on slide show images on my webpage:

Here is another watermark thead that may be helpful is you missed it:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=86506

Michael

Markjay wrote:

I hadn't even thought of that but... you are absolutely right, the right side is more appealing than the left side and likely for the very reason you mention.

I'm also going to shrink the size of the watermark a tad as it is currently grabbing a great deal of attention (not totally a bad thing BTW). So right side bottom, shrink the watermark to a more visually manageable size and I think I've found the right "comfort zone" for my watermarks.

Thank you for your excellent feedback which has inspired me to improve on the watermark in a big way.

Markjay · March 8, 2008

Very nice and......
I really like both your watermarks for your images. The first one has a "logoish" look to me and, that's really cool. The second one is very unobtrusive and nice also.

Remember though: IF your goal is protection of your image from theft off your website, someone can still use a screen capture to take a snapshot of your photo which has most of the image viewable / useable (from their point of view). Yes, I believe your watermark is much nicer for image viewing than mine is. Yes, since that is what you feel comfortable and like you should stick with it. Just remember the screen capture capability IF and ONLY if you have any concerns related to theft or unauthorized use.

There are lots of threads here about photographers who had an image stolen / used without their permissions. I seriously doubt if a truly protective watermark were on those images, that anyone would have bothered to go through the trouble, knowing that they can't even screen capture it without that pesky watermark making "cloning it out" not worth the effort.

If you look at what istock.com uses for a watermark or what Andy Williams uses for a watermark on his images http://www.moonriverphotography.com/gallery/2843486_cJ9sk#152358153 it would give you an idea of the length with which some business minded people go through to protect their offerings.

Thank you once again for your input, most valuable to me!

MichaelKirk wrote:

That is exactly what these forums are for.
I just redesigne mine so I have all this watermark info fresh in my head. I did a lot of researching and looking at others to see what appealed to me as well as offered the amount of protection I was comfortable with.

Here area copies of my new watermarks that I am now using:

This watermark is for all photos listed in my galleries - I'm still torn if I want to make this one just a bit bigger or leave it alone...I will probably just leave it:

...and this one for posting samples in forums for critiques, etc as well as will use this one on slide show images on my webpage:

Here is another watermark thead that may be helpful is you missed it:
http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=86506

Michael

Markjay · March 16, 2008

Is this an improvement?
This an improvement on my watermarks?

denisegoldberg · March 16, 2008

Markjay wrote:

This an improvement on my watermarks?

I like this one much better - but that may not be a fair assessment because I really dislike watermarks that are splashed across the entire photo. In most instances I find it takes away from my enjoying the photo.

But - given that you're selling as stock, you may have a good reason for the across the image watermark.

I do like this one though.

--- Denise

MichaelKirk · March 17, 2008

agree
I like this one much better,
Michael

denisegoldberg wrote:

I like this one much better - but that may not be a fair assessment because I really dislike watermarks that are splashed across the entire photo. In most instances I find it takes away from my enjoying the photo.

But - given that you're selling as stock, you may have a good reason for the across the image watermark.

I do like this one though.

--- Denise

Are these watermarks obnoxious?

Comments