Watermarks - what's the best?
Discussion
The bigger it is, the more you need to reduce opacity IMO. I've cycled through a few and settled on simply using my web address. By rotating the text to vertical orientation it's less intrusive for any given size. White text with opacity usually between 20-40%. Positioning is always in a corner but which corner is image dependent.
What you posted up yesterday *might* be ok for signwriting or letterhead but was competing for dominance with the main image.
What you posted up yesterday *might* be ok for signwriting or letterhead but was competing for dominance with the main image.
It depends on the type of image to be honest. When I was doing a lot of event work, selling prints and downloads I used a fairly big watermark. I also went for a squarish one, so that cropping it out would ruin the image, but lowered the opacity.
These days if I use a watermark, it is a subtle one on the bottom corner of the image, usually in black or white.
These days if I use a watermark, it is a subtle one on the bottom corner of the image, usually in black or white.
I'm probably in the minority here. Hate them. Never used them. Never will.
Would take me 20 secs to remove them/crop them out/ clone them out - and they ruin perfectly good photos.
I just don't see why people do it, as copyright is the same with or without them.
Would I ever put bum notes into my music so people couldn't steal it?
As I say... I understand that I swim against the tide on this. Each to his own.
Would take me 20 secs to remove them/crop them out/ clone them out - and they ruin perfectly good photos.
I just don't see why people do it, as copyright is the same with or without them.
Would I ever put bum notes into my music so people couldn't steal it?
As I say... I understand that I swim against the tide on this. Each to his own.
GetCarter said:
I'm probably in the minority here. Hate them. Never used them. Never will.
Would take me 20 secs to remove them - and they ruin perfectly good photos.
I just don't see why people do it, as copyright is the same with or without them.
Would I ever put bum notes into my music so people couldn't steal it?
As I say... I understand that I swim against the tide on this. Each to his own.
I'm with you on this one GC, I don't spend ages on composition just to spoil it with some 72 point.Would take me 20 secs to remove them - and they ruin perfectly good photos.
I just don't see why people do it, as copyright is the same with or without them.
Would I ever put bum notes into my music so people couldn't steal it?
As I say... I understand that I swim against the tide on this. Each to his own.
Each to their own, as you say.
I've recently started using a watermark as I was fed up of people pinching my pics. With a polite request most people will remove, but some just ignore you. So I now consider the watermark as an advert 
I think the OPs watermark is OTT but it certainly stops people cropping or cloning out, so maybe the OP has it right
I think the OPs watermark is OTT but it certainly stops people cropping or cloning out, so maybe the OP has it right
Edited by paul911 on Wednesday 24th July 19:13
I've always just used a small web link & logo in the corner. I try to make it just visible so not to distract (yes, I eyeball the logo transparency for every photo 
)
I don't think it gives much protection from people stealing photos, more useful for a small part of advertising perhaps.
In terms of protecting the image, resolution & compression are probably your biggest defences imo.
)I don't think it gives much protection from people stealing photos, more useful for a small part of advertising perhaps.
In terms of protecting the image, resolution & compression are probably your biggest defences imo.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff