A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 6th 09, 04:09 PM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
OG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?


"zorro" wrote in message
...
Hello there,

My girlfriend set up a little web gallery of her art work. She has a
watermark on all her images but now she's wondering if people will
think she's being pretentious. After all, she is an amateur and no
one's heard of her in the art world.

We agreed it's legitimate to protect her work, but does a watermark
really make a difference? I saw a lot of web galleries and often
images have no watermark.


Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that prevents
direct downloading of images.

On the other hand, some people don't like hanging around waiting for
Flash-heavy sites to stop showing off.


  #2  
Old February 6th 09, 05:12 PM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
John J
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?

OG wrote:

Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that prevents
direct downloading of images.


It keeps the honest (and lazy) honest.

IMHO, a small watermark can even be attractive, and for people who do
download them, a way to quickly distinguish them by source.
  #3  
Old February 6th 09, 08:42 PM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Frank ess
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?



John J wrote:
OG wrote:

Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that
prevents direct downloading of images.


It keeps the honest (and lazy) honest.

IMHO, a small watermark can even be attractive, and for people who
do download them, a way to quickly distinguish them by source.


Including a discreet watermark also establishes the fact that the
water-marker values the image; absence of such a mark, it could be
argued, constitutes an invitation, or a declaration of disinterest in
the image's progress through the world.

--
Frank ess

  #4  
Old February 6th 09, 09:07 PM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Dave[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 12:42:54 -0800, "Frank ess"
wrote:



John J wrote:
OG wrote:

Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that
prevents direct downloading of images.


It keeps the honest (and lazy) honest.

IMHO, a small watermark can even be attractive, and for people who
do download them, a way to quickly distinguish them by source.


Including a discreet watermark also establishes the fact that the
water-marker values the image; absence of such a mark, it could be
argued, constitutes an invitation, or a declaration of disinterest in
the image's progress through the world.



The simple truth is the fact the image-thieves do not care a **** how
much value (or disinterest) the copyright-holder feel towards the
image. Posting it on Internet is to declare it 'free to everybody'.
If it can be stolen it will be stolen. It is a pity but you have to
mess it up with a copyright sign. Not only to say it's yours
but even more making it unusable.

Dave

  #5  
Old February 6th 09, 10:51 PM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Frank ess
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,232
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?



Dave wrote:
On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 12:42:54 -0800, "Frank ess"
wrote:



John J wrote:
OG wrote:

Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that
prevents direct downloading of images.

It keeps the honest (and lazy) honest.

IMHO, a small watermark can even be attractive, and for people who
do download them, a way to quickly distinguish them by source.


Including a discreet watermark also establishes the fact that the
water-marker values the image; absence of such a mark, it could be
argued, constitutes an invitation, or a declaration of disinterest
in the image's progress through the world.



The simple truth is the fact the image-thieves do not care a ****
how much value (or disinterest) the copyright-holder feel towards
the image. Posting it on Internet is to declare it 'free to
everybody'. If it can be stolen it will be stolen. It is a pity but
you have to mess it up with a copyright sign. Not only to say it's
yours
but even more making it unusable.

Dave


The question had to do with "pretentious", didn't it?

"Declare" may be the wrong word. Beyond that, everyone knows your
"simple truth", don't they?

--
Frank ess

  #6  
Old February 7th 09, 08:26 AM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Dave[_28_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 14:51:07 -0800, "Frank ess"
wrote:



The question had to do with "pretentious", didn't it?

"Declare" may be the wrong word. Beyond that, everyone knows your
"simple truth", don't they?



True - had to use a dictionary to confirm the meaning of the word
(although it is obviously an auxiliary derived from pretend).
Is it pretentious to reply to something in another language than your
home language when not being100% sure of the meaning of a specific
word?

I am not a regular reader of this group (in fact 1st time he-)
Only a passer-by.

There is of course the possibility your answer impressed the rest of
the contributors, but over here it only evoked a smile.

Keep well

Dave
http://kuns.fotopic.net/p53776192.html




  #7  
Old February 7th 09, 11:51 AM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?

In uk.rec.photo.misc OG wrote:

"zorro" wrote in message
...
Hello there,

My girlfriend set up a little web gallery of her art work. She has a
watermark on all her images but now she's wondering if people will
think she's being pretentious. After all, she is an amateur and no
one's heard of her in the art world.

We agreed it's legitimate to protect her work, but does a watermark
really make a difference? I saw a lot of web galleries and often
images have no watermark.


Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that prevents
direct downloading of images.

But it's trivial to simply screen scrape the image so that's pointless.

On the other hand, some people don't like hanging around waiting for
Flash-heavy sites to stop showing off.

Quite, flash is definitely a negative pointer as far as I'm concerned.

--
Chris Green
  #8  
Old February 9th 09, 02:15 AM posted to adobe.photoshop.windows,alt.graphics.photoshop,uk.rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
OG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection?


wrote in message
...
In uk.rec.photo.misc OG wrote:

"zorro" wrote in message
...
Hello there,

My girlfriend set up a little web gallery of her art work. She has a
watermark on all her images but now she's wondering if people will
think she's being pretentious. After all, she is an amateur and no
one's heard of her in the art world.

We agreed it's legitimate to protect her work, but does a watermark
really make a difference? I saw a lot of web galleries and often
images have no watermark.


Web galleries often use a Macromedia Flash application as that prevents
direct downloading of images.

But it's trivial to simply screen scrape the image so that's pointless.


right click | Save Picture As ...

compared to

Alt + Prt Scr, Win, All Programs, Accessories, Paint, click . . . . Ctrl+V,
File | Save |*#*|enter picture name |tab| 'J' |tab| Save


Not difficult; but not necessarily 'trivial' either.


*#* represents a navigation to My Documents | My Pictures


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection? John McWilliams Digital SLR Cameras 1 February 6th 09 03:59 PM
|GG| Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection? Paul Furman Digital SLR Cameras 0 February 6th 09 02:14 PM
Is it pretentious to watermark images for copyright protection? Mike Coon[_2_] Digital SLR Cameras 0 February 6th 09 11:48 AM
Copyright / Protection of digital photos Tom Thackrey Digital Photography 0 December 10th 06 04:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.