Do I bother watermarking?

[Xyttik]

I know there was a thread on this earlier in the year, but it seemed mostly satirical, and I couldn't really discern a proper answer from it.
Also, I didn't want to bump such an old thread, so I thought I would ask in plain English:

Is there any point to watermarking?

At the moment, I'm not selling my photos to clients, and I'm not uploading any to Flickr in a resolution worth stealing.
I don't really care if people like my picture and reblog it on tumblr or whatever they do.

The only thing I don't want is people stealing my photos and saying they took them.

My copyright data is stored in the .exif and if people wanted to take my picture, I know they'd do it anyway.

But is watermarking worth doing, or will clever people still steal my pictures, remove my watermark and say they took them?

 

[Rephargotohp]

Locking your house only keeps your friends out

The only reason I will do it is IF the image gets reblogged, I want the self promotion of me and people know who took it.

Stealing wise, It's hopeless

 

[2WheelPhoto]

clever thieves will always steal and look at some of the watermarked pics. the watermark serves only as a lame distraction. just my nooB humble opinion.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

DON'T DO IT!​

 

[LightSpeed]

I watermark everything just to psss everyone off.

Oh it would look better without that watermark LightSpeed.
" You know, your watermark isn't protecting anything and it can be removed"
My all time favorite: " That watermark is distracting!"
" Why do you watermark at all?"

Well, there are many reasons, but mainly because I want to.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Well, there are many reasons...

Oh, do tell!

 

[Tee]

To the OP: how often are people stealing your pictures? If you're asking us to help you make a decision, then my answer would be no, based on the situation you're describing, you don't need to watermark. I don't watermark mine but then again I'm not in business, make mediocre images and don't think I'm that important enough in the cyber world that someone's going to steal my images for something prolific.

I personally find watermarks distracting and rarely see watermarks on photos that don't distract from the image or are appealing. I think some people, particularly the new photographer who posts online, watermark for self-validation and not for advertisement. Again, just my opinion in a sea of thousands.

 

[LightSpeed]

Well, there are many reasons...

Oh, do tell!

It's a mater of personal preference. If people want to watermark their images when they put them on the net, " Why shouldn't they?
If that's what they want to do, who are you to tell them not to? Who am I to tell them not to?
I'm well aware that watermarks are frowned upon here. I might even make mine bigger.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

You said many reasons. I wanted to hear some of them.

Tee's 'self-validation' is a very good reason.

 

[LightSpeed]

I've given 2.
Specify a number and I'll see what I can do.

Between 1 and 5.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Earlier this year? There is one of these threads at least a couple times a week. Watermarks are a deterrent but not a failsafe. Register your copyrights as the best theft protection. So if you like them and feel safer, then go for it. Its your call.

 

[Josh66]

For a watermark to be effective, it ruins the picture (that's kind of the point, isn't it?).

If it's small enough to still enjoy the photo, it's small enough to remove. If it's large enough to 'protect' the photo, it's large enough to make the photo not worth looking at.


The only place I can see watermarks having a place are proofs. You want to show them the pictures, but you don't want them to be so good that they just print them without going through you. In that case, I would just watermark "proof" across it.

 

[Steve01]

If your goal is to let anyone uses your pictures but make sure you get the credit, copyright them through your country's copyright office.
The be prepared to search out and file suite on any violators.

Any other method like watermarking, low rez images, exif data, etc. is futile and can be defeated.
I pretty sure this isn't what you want to do so basically the answer is there's nothing you can do to ensure someone doesn't claim your work as his or hers.

 

[Ballistics]

For the person who said locking your house only keeps your friends out is what I call the victims mindset.
Locks are a deterrent. There are ways around a lock, but for someone to break a lock would take more of a commitment to a crime, then opening an unlocked door.
It's like the people who leave their car windows rolled down, or their keys in their car. A person walking by without any plans of stealing your car or the items inside can alter their intentions by seeing
the easy availability.

This exact thing goes along with watermarking your photos. If a person sees a watermark, they can identify that there is the attempt by a photographer to claim his or her work. If they really want it, with a little know how, most watermarks are gone with just 5 minutes of photoshop.

When showing your work for a critique, if stealing is something you want to prevent, show it with out the watermark and then delete it after a period of time, and then replace it with a watermarked version.

Some mind it, some don't. Either way, live and let live and don't let the choices of others bother you unless it affects you.
I've never watermarked a photo, but if I ever make something of myself in the photography world I will most likely watermark (and copyright) my images. This way, people can see that the images with out a water mark, are originally mine.

 

[ManhattanShutterBug]

Personally I can't stand watermarks, they ruin the image for me. However I do watermark my photos I give to clients for online purposes (fb,google+ etc) but that is only for the free advertising.