Can someone remove a watermark please?

[480sparky]

I couldn't find the license terms anywhere on their website, but I don't really see how trying to clone the watermark out (is it one large one, or a bunch of small ones?) would make you a "pirate"............

Look for their EULA (End User License Agreement).

 

[Josh66]

I couldn't find the license terms anywhere on their website, but I don't really see how trying to clone the watermark out (is it one large one, or a bunch of small ones?) would make you a "pirate"............

Look for their EULA (End User License Agreement).

I tried to. Couldn't find it. I didn't want to install the software just to read that...

Just my opinion (obviously, since they didn't seem to think to make it available on their website), but that's the sort of thing you should be able to read before you download and begin to install something. Crazy, I know.
If it is on the website, it's well hidden.

 

[Josh66]

I couldn't find the license terms anywhere on their website, but I don't really see how trying to clone the watermark out (is it one large one, or a bunch of small ones?) would make you a "pirate".

It's natural for us to want to assign a degree to this sort of thing... after all, if we speed by 5mph, we're still speeding, but we don't usually consider that a big deal, and it's pretty easy to claim ignorance. When someone buys a radar detector, though, it's pretty clear that the intent is to be able to speed -- just like intentionally removing a watermark. We all recognize what the watermark is there for, so when you circumvent it on purpose, you're showing an above-average level of knowledge and will to defraud the owner of the watermark.

Sure, it's just a few bucks for the software, so if you want to make the case that's it's just a *little* piracy, that's 100% up to you, but I think the point is that you'd be using the software for free to do something the publisher really believes you should be paying for.

First of all, I'm not saying that you should pirate software - but at the same time, I don't really care if you do. This is just a general observation (not related to this thread or any single post in it), but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer...


Anyway. Where I was going with that (what you quoted), was that you are using the software for it's intended purpose. What you do with the file after that is none of their business. If by using their software, you are agreeing that you will not alter the image using another software suite - well, then that is no software that I want to use.

edit
And that is one reason you should be able to read the EULA BEFORE you download and start installing something. If I'm not going to agree to it, knowing that up front might be nice. I looked again on their website, and still couldn't find it. I looked in the FAQs and in the Support section. And at the bottom of the page, because sometimes they just stick crap like that there.

 

[480sparky]

...... but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer.............

And your basis for this is what?

 

[Tailgunner]

...... but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer.............

And your basis for this is what?

1+

 

[Josh66]

...... but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer.............

And your basis for this is what?

Just an observation, like I said. LOL. Getting defensive?

I've just ran across a lot of people who in public will condemn any sort of piracy, but in private tell you where to get everything 'for free'. Pretty much just like how the people who constantly have to tell you what a "Good Christian" they are always seem to have questionable morals.

 

[lambertpix]

I couldn't find the license terms anywhere on their website, but I don't really see how trying to clone the watermark out (is it one large one, or a bunch of small ones?) would make you a "pirate"............

Look for their EULA (End User License Agreement).

I tried to. Couldn't find it. I didn't want to install the software just to read that...

Just my opinion (obviously, since they didn't seem to think to make it available on their website), but that's the sort of thing you should be able to read before you download and begin to install something. Crazy, I know.
If it is on the website, it's well hidden.

I can help with that: Let me google that for you

I couldn't find the license terms anywhere on their website, but I don't really see how trying to clone the watermark out (is it one large one, or a bunch of small ones?) would make you a "pirate".

It's natural for us to want to assign a degree to this sort of thing... after all, if we speed by 5mph, we're still speeding, but we don't usually consider that a big deal, and it's pretty easy to claim ignorance. When someone buys a radar detector, though, it's pretty clear that the intent is to be able to speed -- just like intentionally removing a watermark. We all recognize what the watermark is there for, so when you circumvent it on purpose, you're showing an above-average level of knowledge and will to defraud the owner of the watermark.

Sure, it's just a few bucks for the software, so if you want to make the case that's it's just a *little* piracy, that's 100% up to you, but I think the point is that you'd be using the software for free to do something the publisher really believes you should be paying for.

First of all, I'm not saying that you should pirate software - but at the same time, I don't really care if you do. This is just a general observation (not related to this thread or any single post in it), but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer...


Anyway. Where I was going with that (what you quoted), was that you are using the software for it's intended purpose. What you do with the file after that is none of their business. If by using their software, you are agreeing that you will not alter the image using another software suite - well, then that is no software that I want to use.

The watermark only shows up on images created with the trial software. The intended purpose of the *trial software* is to *try* the *software*. Nowhere on the web site is it implied that the software is free, or shareware, or donationware, or anything of the sort. I'm sure you've experienced time-limited trials, where you have full functionality for a period of time and then the software stops -- Adobe's trials work like this, for example. HDRsoft's trial will run forever (pretty generous, IMO), but it puts a watermark on the processed photos because *it's a trial*. That's just how they've chosen to limit the software so users will be properly motivated to buy a license.

Once a license is purchased, watermarks will no longer be embedded in any photos that are processed. Furthermore, there are instructions on the website that help you remove the watermark from a previously-processed photo using a *licensed* copy of Photomatix Pro:

FAQ about HDR photography software Photomatix - Tone Mapping, HDR images creation and Exposure Fusion

Seriously -- $39 for Photomatix Essentials is a killer deal. You can't buy a decent *filter* for $39. Maybe a lens hood. There you go -- you can get a lens hood for less than $39. HDRsoft even lets you apply the $39 to the price of Pro later if you want:

FAQ about HDR photography software Photomatix - Tone Mapping, HDR images creation and Exposure Fusion

Oh, and yes -- I bought the software, in case you were implying anything.

 

[480sparky]

Just an observation, like I said. LOL. Getting defensive?

I've just ran across a lot of people who in public will condemn any sort of piracy, but in private tell you where to get everything 'for free'. Pretty much just like how the people who constantly have to tell you what a "Good Christian" they are always seem to have questionable morals.

Not getting defensive at all.

Just wondering why you would now assume my computer is dripping with pirated software.

 

[Josh66]

I can help with that: Let me google that for you

Thanks. Try finding that from their main page, lol.

Now that I've read it, I don't see anything in there that would stop someone from cloning out the watermark.

Clone away. Perfectly legal. End of discussion.



You guys are getting way too defensive, lol. I wasn't talking about anything I've seen in this thread. Although some people seemed to be implying that it was illegal.

You do NOT have permission to remove the watermark. I strongly suspect the terms and conditions for using the trial software would cover that.
Plus its not a cool thing to do.

Like that. ^^^

First sentence, boldly stating that you do not have permission to alter it. Second sentence, admitting that he didn't actually know whether you had permission or not.




I even said that the OP should go ahead and buy it. If he was only going to use this software once or twice - yeah, clone that **** out. If you're going to be using it on anything even resembling a regular basis, that would get old very fast.



EDIT
lambertpix,
The rest of your post (unquoted), I totally get and agree with. That was never in question. I fully understand why the watermark is there, and I would even say that it should be a very effective model. Who would rather clone watermarks out of hundreds of images when you could just prevent them from appearing in the first place for a small fee. A very small fee, once you factor in all that time that would otherwise be spent cloning crap out.

I would not pay $40 to process one HDR. I'm not really that much into HDR, but that's beside the point. If I was into it, I sure as hell wouldn't want to waste all that time cloning out watermarks when I could 'unlock' the software so easily.


My point is, cloning the watermark out does not make you a pirate.

And your example of delivering watermarked images to a client ... proofs, yes - watermark them. Proofs only need to be good enough for me to tell if it's 'print-worthy' or not. I personally would not pay for watermarked images (prints, or files meant to be printed by the end user) though.

 

[Tailgunner]

...... but it seems to me that the people who are most vocal about the "evils of piracy" always end up being the ones with the most pirated crap on their computer.............

And your basis for this is what?

Just an observation, like I said. LOL. Getting defensive?

Your remarks are coming across as if those of us replying to this thread are pirating software. So I'm curious as to exactly how it is you came to your conclusions?

 

[Josh66]

And your basis for this is what?

Just an observation, like I said. LOL. Getting defensive?

Your remarks are coming across as if those of us replying to this thread are pirating software. So I'm curious as to exactly how it is you came to your conclusions?

I'm curious how it is you came to your conclusions since I have stated multiple times that this is not the case.


It sort of seems to me that you guys are just upset that I am "defending" the right to clone the watermarks out, which is completely legal and in no way piracy. If you disagree, show me the part of the (very brief) EULA that you feel supports your case.

 

[480sparky]

I'm curious how it is you came to your conclusions since I have stated multiple times that this is not the case.

Same twisted logic as believing removing watermarks isn't piracy.

 

[Josh66]

I'm curious how it is you came to your conclusions since I have stated multiple times that this is not the case.

Same twisted logic as believing removing watermarks isn't piracy.

I edited my post as you were replying... (Thought I could get it in before a reply came in.)

"It sort of seems to me that you guys are just upset that I am "defending" the right to clone the watermarks out, which is completely legal and in no way piracy. If you disagree, show me the part of the (very brief) EULA that you feel supports your case."


How is it piracy?

 

[Tailgunner]

I'm curious how it is you came to your conclusions since I have stated multiple times that this is not the case.

Same twisted logic as believing removing watermarks isn't piracy.

I edited my post as you were replying... (Thought I could get it in before a reply came in.)

"It sort of seems to me that you guys are just upset that I am "defending" the right to clone the watermarks out, which is completely legal and in no way piracy. If you disagree, show me the part of the (very brief) EULA that you feel supports your case."


How is it piracy?

I'm not upset, I'm just curious as to how you came to the conclusion that I'm pirating software?

 

[Josh66]

Same twisted logic as believing removing watermarks isn't piracy.

I edited my post as you were replying... (Thought I could get it in before a reply came in.)

"It sort of seems to me that you guys are just upset that I am "defending" the right to clone the watermarks out, which is completely legal and in no way piracy. If you disagree, show me the part of the (very brief) EULA that you feel supports your case."


How is it piracy?

I'm not upset, I'm just curious as to how you came to the conclusion that I'm pirating software?

Again, refresh my memory as to when I said this.

You're reading far too much into my posts. This is the FIFTH time I am saying it. Rather than repeating myself yet again, I will have to assume that you're just trolling.