New Watermark c+c

[halestorm]

Watermarks are pretentious.

well I disagree I think they are an excellent way to be recognized online.

 

[Robin Usagani]

You get this:
Usain Bolt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Watermarks are pretentious.

Maybe so, but they can also be good advertising.

Yes, but what will googling H lightningbolt S yield? :roll:

OP, when you ask for peoples thoughts, you get them, whether you like it or not.

 

[halestorm]

Watermarks are pretentious.

Maybe so, but they can also be good advertising.

Yes, but what will googling H lightningbolt S yield? :roll:


OP, when you ask for peoples thoughts, you get them, whether you like it or not.

Hmmm you have a good point there although I dont have a site because my photography is still sub par so I'm not sure googling Hale Storm will give any of my results either.

 

[mishele]

I would worry less about your watermark and more about the quality of your photos. IMHO

 

[mishele]

Do you want people to google Hale Storm to see "sub par " photos?

 

[halestorm]

I would worry less about your watermark and more about the quality of your photos. IMHO

Wow that was a great shot "knock out" but seriously I think I have a couple dozen quality photos! But thank you for your concern

 

[bennielou]

I would worry less about your watermark and more about the quality of your photos. IMHO

Wow, that was pretty snotty.....

Halestorm, personally, I think it's a bit busy. It draws your eye away from the photo. Maybe something a bit more subtle?

 

[halestorm]

Do you want people to google Hale Storm to see "sub par " photos?

I am sure that people like a lot of my photos I am just my worst critic and I dont want to do what everyone else does and make a website with good photos on it I want to make sure I have jaw dropping great photos before I go that route!

 

[halestorm]

I would worry less about your watermark and more about the quality of your photos. IMHO

Wow, that was pretty snotty.....

Halestorm, personally, I think it's a bit busy. It draws your eye away from the photo. Maybe something a bit more subtle?

yeah, I was thinking of making it smaller on my future photos! Oh and Thanks for the defense :thumbup:

 

[mishele]

It wasn't meant to be snotty and it wasn't a personal attack. It was an honest opinion on watermarks. You said yourself that your shots are sub-par. I have no idea what your work looks like.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

ok so the whole point of this watermark is to use it as a signature.

Then its not really a watermark. Its a logo or signature. Watermarks go over the subject to deter use of the photo without your permission. They are also common on Corporate Checks, to deter fraud. Its a theft deterrent tool. As for how your logo looks? It looks OK, not my style or taste, but to each their own. I find logos to look cheesy on photos unless they are an actual legitimate business and being used on proofs for customers. Otherwise, I say a simple name or actual signature is classier. It can come off as pretentious to some people, but nothing wrong with someone placing their name on their art, no matter what the quality. If I wrote a book, you can bet your ass I would put my name on the cover, whether you liked the book or not. Nothing wrong with having pride in your work. The same people that piss and moan about the merits of art and how its subjective and blah blah blah, crush you if you sign your photos with anything less than a museum quality print. Do what you like to do. None of the hugely successful people in history ( whether its business, or the arts ) ever got where they are by doing what everyone around them espoused. They got there by doing what they felt. However, with that said, you need to be prepared for the critics that will fault you for doing whatever you want.

 

[halestorm]

It wasn't meant to be snotty and it wasn't a personal attack. It was an honest opinion on watermarks. You said yourself that your shots are sub-par. I have no idea what your work looks like.

Well you are welcome to look through my threads and check my stuff out. I have already looked at your work and it's really good so I'm not sure you'll like my stuff but you never know.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Why not just use your name? Really, that signature doesnt give any info. Plus, who would want that logo on their photo? It will probably only work if you are an automotive photographer or something.

 

[halestorm]

Why not just use your name? Really, that signature doesnt give any info. Plus, who would want that logo on their photo? It will probably only work if you are an automotive photographer or something.

Well I actually do a lot of automotive photography. Also I would never print a photo with my watermark or signature on it. That would be super cheesy. It's just for online networking purposes!

Here's a sample

 

[Robin Usagani]

I know you wont print it with that. People still dont want the pic of their kids with that logo floating online. Just my 2 cents.

Why not just use your name? Really, that signature doesnt give any info. Plus, who would want that logo on their photo? It will probably only work if you are an automotive photographer or something.

Well I actually do a lot of automotive photography. Also I would never print a photo with my watermark or signature on it. That would be super cheesy. It's just for online networking purposes!

Here's a sample