Watermarking photographs?

[Mr.Segment]

What should be the general consensus when posting photographs on here? What do you all think of watermarking photos?

I notice they get used here and there, not difficult spotting the source of the photos since a lot on here can only be found on this site and more often than not may not have been seen before at all.

Don't mind it much myself, not watermarking my images. After all I don't own the rights, just the original photo. But it would be a different scenario if they suddenly started appearing on boots. Not because I want a cut, just because there are some people I'd rather not assist in carrying out their business.

Any thoughts?

Only for the Secret Society?

 

[mansson66]

....because there are some people I'd rather not assist in carrying out their business.

Yay because of this

 

[greenfuzz]

That's not a bad idea. I believe the Secret Society - and I could be wrong - is set up to "open" by the number of posts...so if somebody posts enough he/she will eventually be let in. Or maybe Mark has to invite somebody based on what they post and whether he thinks they should be allowed in. Not sure.

 

[Michael W]

No to watermarking. As you note, you don't own the copyright, just a print or neg. However you do need to realise that if you post images online anyone can take them and use them for whatever purpose they like. So if you don't want anyone else to use them don't post them online. If you do put them online, shrug your shoulders and accept they will start showing up in other places.

 

[EXPO67]

If I were you I'd watermark them with your name, your Forum ID or perhaps even a logo. They're your pictures, you bought the negatives that will eventually generate previously unseen photos.

 

[chas_kit]

If you watermark, I'd suggest doing it in an area of the photo that's not vital to the subject. If your copy of that photo turns out to be the only one that ever shows up on the internet, it would be a little sad to have it marked up forever. Put your watermark on the side or even outside the frame and 99% of copycats won't bother to attempt to remove it.

Years ago I got into an argument with the guy from bedazled about this - he would put his site's web address over the videos he posted. I understand the reasons completely - you work making stuff available, why should some nobody rip it off for whatever purpose, good or bad. However, I just couldn't see marking up a rare work. That's nothing more than defacing it. I hate seeing Getty or Corbis watermarks on photos, it's nothing but destruction of art.

Here's an idea for a programmer - publish a way to watermark a photo that can be automatically undone, if you have the code. After 5 or 10 or 20 years, that year's code is published and all of 2011's watermarks can be reversed.