Boid
All-Pro
- Location
- Bangalore, India
- Name
- Rajiv
Oh wow. Stunning replies indeed.
Let's start with Magnum's opinion on the matter. They used to watermark their pictures, they don't any more. By Bob's logic, they must have stopped making a living from their photographs -
Magnum Photos Home
Gordon, a watermark does detract from looking at an image, and unfortunately to me it signals that the photograph was most likely taken by an amateur, who is more intent on protecting his image, than presenting it well. So in that sense I will continue to judge it and move on to other images that haven't been maligned. If however, it gets you more work, keep at it for sure.
Bob, the guy running a Photoshop webinar class, I'm assuming, could have cloned out the watermark with ease and used your image anyways. How does watermarking prevent that?
The purpose of the original post was to point out that watermarks are ugly, and in most instances, an UN-necessary evil. Somehow the entire thread became about theft. I call *cough* bullshit. In my opinion watermarks are at best a work of desperation and at its worst (as Gary points out) acts of unfettered narcissism.
The thinking behind putting up a watermark goes like this -
1. My images are getting stolen
2. I must do something
3. This is something
4. I must do it
Ok, now on to solutions to the problem of theft -
1. STOP uploading print sized images! If your photograph ends up in print without your approval, stop making it available.
2. Use CC licensing to share your images
3. Recognize that your images will always get stolen and there's nothing you can do about it WITHOUT DEFILING YOUR IMAGE. Let me re-iterate that. There's... nothing, nada, pfffft, diddly-squat... that you can do about your image getting used on the web. So as Gordon pointed out, ex post facto you can send DMCC take-downs or notices etc, for the images to get taken down. In MOST regions of the world, that will achieve NOTHING. If your image gets hosted on a Chinese server on a Chinese website, best of luck getting a response to your DMCC. So suck it up.
Solutions on generating awareness -
1. The idea for this post originated when I came across an article, where a photographer was giving away prints of his work by leaving them hanging on walls in various parts of the city. GIVING AWAY his work to generate awareness about who he was, and the kind of work he did. There are 3.5 trillion (!) pictures that have been taken till date, 380 billion of which were taken last year, so if you have ANY perspective at all, recognize the fact that your image needs ALL THE HELP it can get to make the best possible case for itself out there. A watermark makes your image that bit worse.
2. Teach! If you actually know how to make an image, share how you did it. In fact, do the exact OPPOSITE of what a watermark sets out to do. Here's a wedding photographer who doesn't watermark his images - Ryan Brenizer — NYC Wedding Photographer. Problem solver, storyteller. » "Work is Love Made Visible." --Kahlil Gibran and actually has a 'photographic process' named after him.
Let's start with Magnum's opinion on the matter. They used to watermark their pictures, they don't any more. By Bob's logic, they must have stopped making a living from their photographs -
Magnum Photos Home
Gordon, a watermark does detract from looking at an image, and unfortunately to me it signals that the photograph was most likely taken by an amateur, who is more intent on protecting his image, than presenting it well. So in that sense I will continue to judge it and move on to other images that haven't been maligned. If however, it gets you more work, keep at it for sure.
Bob, the guy running a Photoshop webinar class, I'm assuming, could have cloned out the watermark with ease and used your image anyways. How does watermarking prevent that?
The purpose of the original post was to point out that watermarks are ugly, and in most instances, an UN-necessary evil. Somehow the entire thread became about theft. I call *cough* bullshit. In my opinion watermarks are at best a work of desperation and at its worst (as Gary points out) acts of unfettered narcissism.
The thinking behind putting up a watermark goes like this -
1. My images are getting stolen
2. I must do something
3. This is something
4. I must do it
Ok, now on to solutions to the problem of theft -
1. STOP uploading print sized images! If your photograph ends up in print without your approval, stop making it available.
2. Use CC licensing to share your images
3. Recognize that your images will always get stolen and there's nothing you can do about it WITHOUT DEFILING YOUR IMAGE. Let me re-iterate that. There's... nothing, nada, pfffft, diddly-squat... that you can do about your image getting used on the web. So as Gordon pointed out, ex post facto you can send DMCC take-downs or notices etc, for the images to get taken down. In MOST regions of the world, that will achieve NOTHING. If your image gets hosted on a Chinese server on a Chinese website, best of luck getting a response to your DMCC. So suck it up.
Solutions on generating awareness -
1. The idea for this post originated when I came across an article, where a photographer was giving away prints of his work by leaving them hanging on walls in various parts of the city. GIVING AWAY his work to generate awareness about who he was, and the kind of work he did. There are 3.5 trillion (!) pictures that have been taken till date, 380 billion of which were taken last year, so if you have ANY perspective at all, recognize the fact that your image needs ALL THE HELP it can get to make the best possible case for itself out there. A watermark makes your image that bit worse.
2. Teach! If you actually know how to make an image, share how you did it. In fact, do the exact OPPOSITE of what a watermark sets out to do. Here's a wedding photographer who doesn't watermark his images - Ryan Brenizer — NYC Wedding Photographer. Problem solver, storyteller. » "Work is Love Made Visible." --Kahlil Gibran and actually has a 'photographic process' named after him.