Working with digital images

[rhinorick]

So .... do you all think there is a need to watermark photos when showing them online?

I have been using a watermark ever since I created my online photo galleries and have been told that it is not necessary ... and some people at one photo site were actually offended   :-/ when I posted photos from my galleries that were watermarked.  

As I explained to them ... there are a lot, and I mean a LOT, of people out there who copy photos from web sites to use on their own web sites.  Sure, a 500 pixel-wide image is not good for printing larger than 5 inches at 100 ppi, but they are very nice to use for web sites.

Watermarks are not meant to offend those who are honest.  They are meant to protect our work from those who are less than honest.

There are even people out there (I have met 2 so far) who actually teach others how to remove watermarks from others' photos.  :-/

I have quit using watermarks ... for now.

Anyway ... what do you guys think?

[ShutterbugGail]

As they say, the only way to totally protect your images is to not post them online. In any case, you'll find  helpful information here:

http://www.digicamhelp.com/learn/common-questions/protect.php


For related information, click on these two links on the left-hand side of the above page:

- Copyrighting digital photos

- Registering copyrighted photos

[Deb]

Hi, if the image is of normal size, watermark it and include your copyright tag. If, on the other hand, the image is so very small that the watermark obliterates the image, I'd opt for a copyright tag instead. I use both depending on the viewable size of my image when presented online.

[rhinorick]

Wow, thanks for all the info Gail and Deb.  

I did a search here at digicamhelp for "watermark" and the search came back empty.   Thanks for the links!

Deb, as far as the "watermark obliterating the image"  , I have tried to not do that, although some might disagree.  Let me show you a couple examples and see what you think:





Are they ok?  Does the watermark obscure the photos in those 2 examples?

[Deb]

Your watermarks are fine. They are discrete enough not to obliterate the image, yet noticable enough to prevent someone from lifting your image and using it without your permission.

BTW, alternatives to the word "proof" would be a copyright symbol or your logo if you have one. For larger images you could watermark with a logo or your copyright info.

[rhinorick]

Thanks Deb.

Ohhhhh ... good idea.  A "©" as the watermark itself.  Cool idea.

I noticed that you do not use a watermark on your gallery images.  Is that because you have used a java applet, which kinda protects them?

[Deb]

Yes. And, in this case, the images are small. The copyright, however, is present on each mat and stated indepth on each page.

When I present images for client review (private password protected online proofing), which are larger, I watermark them with my copyright info across the center of each image and pull the online preview off the web after image selections are made. I don't display larger images online in public webs. 

[rhinorick]

Actually, the images on your site are quite nicely sized - as far as online images go.  They are at least 720 pixels on your title java bar, and 400 pixels in your galleries.  They would be quite nice for copying and using on other web pages somewhere.  

But I won't copy them without your permission.  

I really like the copyright notice you placed at the bottom of your pages.  May I copy that?  

[ShutterbugGail]

 They would be quite nice for copying and using on other web pages somewhere.  

But I won't copy them without your permission.  

I certainly hope not!!  


When someone asks permission to use one of my photos online, I'm very picky who I say yes to. And I'm not even a pro, like Deb.

There are so many great photos available for use FREE under the Creative Commons license that it amazes me why others would steal one.  I use Creative Commons and fully copyrighted images at Digicamhelp. If I get permission from Deb and others to use one of their images, they get a full credit line including copyright.

About Creative Commons:

http://www.digicamhelp.com/learn/common-questions/cc.php

[Deb]

Permissions for use are typically evaluated and assessed a fee.  Unauthorized use is tracked. If you'd like more info, IM me.

I really like the copyright notice you placed at the bottom of your pages.  May I copy that?  

Only if you wish to pay the attorney's fee for writing it. Instead, I'd stick with what you are currently using.

[ShutterbugGail]

I want to discourage anyone from direct or indirect encouragement of copying any copyrighted item that doesn't belong to them, even if only meant in jest.

Copyright infringement is not only illegal but unethical and, imho, immoral.

Gail, administrator/owner/editior
Digicamhelp.com

[rhinorick]

Oh my .....    I think I have been totally misunderstood here.  

I fully agree Deb and Gail.  Actually, I could not agree more.  That was my whole point.  I want to protect my photos and other works from those who do - and they are out there - copy stuff even though it is illegal and immoral.

And I would never copy someone else's work without their permission.   That is why I asked Deb for permission to even use the idea of the copyright line.

I will not use it since she did not give me permission.  But it did help me know what I need to include there, since I did not include a notice on my photo gallery site, only on my message boards.

I'm sorry everyone.  

[ShutterbugGail]

Oh my .....    I think I have been totally misunderstood here.  

That's okay rhinorick. It can be easy to misunderstand something online so, just in case others do, I wanted to clarify.

A lot of very useful information was shared because of your questions, and that can only be good!

[rhinorick]

Thank you Gail. :-)

Gail said in an IM that the statement that might get misinterpreted is when I said "They are at least 720 pixels on your title java bar, and 400 pixels in your galleries.  They would be quite nice for copying and using on other web pages somewhere."

I would like to explain what I meant, as it was meant as a help/tip to everyone who posts images online.

I meant that when we post images/photos online, if they are a nice size to display on our web sites (even if not a good size for printing - although any photo 600 pixels or more can be printed quite nicely as a 6 inch photo at 100 ppi on most good printers today), then they would be nice sizes for others to copy and use, whether we give them permission or not, on their web sites.    I have had that happen to me, so I wanted to warn everyone.

That is why I asked the original question about using a watermark.  It seems to me that it is necessary for protecting our work.  Even if the truly depraved can still remove the watermarks and use our images.    Gail did post some good alternatives for protecting our images above.  Thanks Gail.

And thanks for letting me explain.  I hope that helps.