to watermark or not to watermark for an art gallery?

[Charliedelta]

Hi,

I'm replying to a call for artists for an art gallery and I am submitting some of my pictures.

The gallery requires that the images be 1600pixels on the longest size at 72dpi, so I don't really feel scared of image theft for printing, but I was wondering if I should still put my logo as watermark. There are no specifics on watermarking in the requirements.

Does anybody have any experience or suggestions?

Thanks

 

[KC1]

I wouldn't watermark any gallery submission, just mark the back clearly and add accompanying documentation.
If it's digital, you can embed a watermark if you like that is not visible.

 

[KmH]

The gallery requires that the images be 1600pixels on the longest size at 72dpi.

Thanks

For digital files?
The ppi (dpi is the wrong term) can be changed to what ever a thief wants it to be.

1600 pixels @ 100 ppi would print at 16 inches and depending on image content would probably make a decent print.

I did not watermark digital files of photographs, but I did hand sign prints I had made for art galleries to sell.

 

[john.margetts]

If you have a 'watermark' on the face of the picture, the gallery might well assume it is a part of the picture so, unless you want the pictures on the gallery wall with the 'watermark' in place, do not add it.

 

[table1349]

Are we talking a real live brick and mortar walk into it and look at the photos gallery or is this some kind of online thing? If it is a real gallery and not some on line thing then no do not watermark your work. Any real gallery is going to have a card by each piece of work with the name of the piece, artist and price. The idea of putting your name/studio name and location went out at the turn of the last century and was usually done on the cardboard mounting, not the photo.