Watermarking my images

[JosephYaccarino]

Hello all!

Recently I have started to watermark my images, as they are going on popular websites. Many people told me that my watermark is incredibly bold and stands out way too much. I would like to use my name and I would like it to blend in more with my photos.

Here is one of the photos with the obnoxious watermark.
Subie Flickr - Photo Sharing

How can I go about doing this? I used the default watermarking technique from Lightroom 5. Any information would be awesome!

Thank you all.

 

[waday]

That's not obnoxious, IMO, but you could try making it slightly transparent?

 

[robbins.photo]

Honestly?

If the purpose of a watermark is to prevent people from stealing your images, well any watermark that isn't completely obnoxious is going to be too easy to photoshop out. Sort of makes using them a moot point.

 

[clel miller]

I have no suggestions regarding how, but.......Man, if THAT is obnoxious. I think just about all Watermark/Copyright stampings are in trouble.

 

[waday]

How Famous Images Look with Terrible Watermarks

 

[Buckster]

First, to each his / her own when it comes to if and why and how big and how gaudy to use watermarks and copyright notices on photos. Different people have different opinions and reasons for all of that stuff, and whatever works for them works for them, and that's good enough for me.

The reason I use a copyright notice is to make it clear that it's not a photo in "the commons" or in the "public domain". Truly, it's as easy as can possibly be to Photoshop it right off the photo, but that act is interpreted by Federal judges at copyright trials as proof that the infringer was knowingly engaging in something unlawful. Bad enough if they use copyrighted work without permission, but woe be to them that remove the copyright notice in the commission of that crime and incur further monetary compensation wrath.

Another common use is to develop name recognition in association with your photos. Should one or many of them become popular, it can't hurt to have your name on it / them somewhere, to make it possible for people to track you down in efforts to buy your work or commission new work from you. It's a cheap and effective way to advertise your abilities.

That said, I use a very small copyright notice, nearly always in the bottom right corner of the photo. I try to make it quite small yet still be legible, and in plain text to help with that. I also try to get the color of it to blend in with the colors in the photo, often, the color right there in that corner that it will be on top of, but slightly lighter or darker, depending. I want it to be barely noticeable, but there if one cares to look for it. So, I work to get mine to blend in as well.

What I found is that, for me, LR works well for making a watermark that will always be the same, on every photo, in a nice automated way. But as I want to blend it, color-wise for each photo, LR is more cumbersome to work with for individual photos than what I like to use instead, which is Photoshop.

In Photoshop, I have an action designed to place the notice, and then I can just change the color of it with the color picker eyedropper, clicked in a nearby suitable color, then sometimes adjusting lighter or darker just a tiny bit from there.

It works for me, but watermarks and copyright notices and such tend to be very personal to each artist and, really, only you can decide what's right for you.

 

[KmH]

. . . any watermark that isn't completely obnoxious is going to be too easy to photoshop out. Sort of makes using them a moot point.

As pointed out by Buckster, that is a shortsided viewpoint.

You need to do more than just add your signature, or a logo.

Use the Exif and IPTC metadata fields to embed your copyright and/or licensing information, collectively known as copyright management information or CMI.
DSLR cameras usually have a feature that lets you embed some CMI when you release the shutter.
Most image editing software applications allow you to make and use Exif/IPTC templates to add CMI metadata when you use those image editing software applications to upload images to your computer storage.

http://www.photoattorney.com/five-things-you-can-do-to-protect-your-online-images/

 

[robbins.photo]

As pointed out by Buckster, that is a shortsided viewpoint.

You need to do more than just add your signature, or a logo.

Use the Exif and IPTC metadata fields to embed your copyright and/or licensing information, collectively known as copyright management information or CMI.
DSLR cameras usually have a feature that lets you embed some CMI when you release the shutter.
Most image editing software applications allow you to make and use Exif/IPTC templates to add CMI metadata when you use those image editing software applications to upload images to your computer storage.

http://www.photoattorney.com/five-things-you-can-do-to-protect-your-online-images/

Using the EXIF data helps, but it's no guarantee either - it really isn't all that difficult to edit that out. It is effective if the person stealing the photo doesn't realize it's there or doesn't know enough to remove it - and since a lot of folks don't know enough to even check the EXIF data it's not really all that obvious that the photo has been misappropriated unless your checking that yourself.

As for whether or not someone wishes to use a watermark or add that info to the EXIF that's up to the individual, if people wish to do so that's fine by me. I do however stand by the statement that a watermark that is small enough not to be too obnoxious really doesn't do much to prevent image theft. Using it to build name recognition.. sure, very valid use there. But not something I commented on and certainly by no means did it deserve a response calling me shortsighted.

 

[Buckster]

All locks, for all things, are only effective at keeping honest people honest.

Thieves don't care what kind of lock you put on anything - if they want the thing bad enough, they'll get it. Your photos, your bike, your car, your wallet, the stuff you have locked up in your house or apartment, the stuff in your U-Haul Storage unit, the money in the till, the paintings in the Louvre, the deposit boxes in the vault, you name it - whatever, wherever.

So, yeah, it's true: There are no guarantees. That doesn't mean we just give up and throw away all the locks and keys though.

 

[dennybeall]

Nothing is foolproof - all you're doing is assisting the honest folks to stay honest.

 

[AceCo55]

The reason I use a copyright notice is to make it clear that it's not a photo in "the commons" or in the "public domain". Truly, it's as easy as can possibly be to Photoshop it right off the photo, but that act is interpreted by Federal judges at copyright trials as proof that the infringer was knowingly engaging in something unlawful. Bad enough if they use copyrighted work without permission, but woe be to them that remove the copyright notice in the commission of that crime and incur further monetary compensation wrath.
Another common use is to develop name recognition in association with your photos. Should one or many of them become popular, it can't hurt to have your name on it / them somewhere, to make it possible for people to track you down in efforts to buy your work or commission new work from you. It's a cheap and effective way to advertise your abilities.

These are the reasons I use an "obnoxious" watermark slap bang dead centre - no apologies.
Why? I shoot local sport and the kids/parents think absolutely NOTHING of taking a screen shot ... even to the point of proudly showing ME, on their phones, how much they enjoyed my photo!!!
At this point I just see it as brand awareness - anyone who sees it on their Facebook pages knows where it came from.

Your asking how you can make yours less "obnoxious" - which it isn't AT ALL.
I use PhotoShop:
What I have done is created a .png file with my web address in the centre - select your font
I then turn the "Fill" slider down to 0 (yes, zero) - your text disappears
Then add a "Bevel and Emboss" effect to that layer (adjust to suit) - the text is still transparent but the effect shows up on the outline of the lettering.
Then adjust the Opacity of the layer until the embossed effect is as prominent as you wish.

The good thing about doing it this way is that it is readable on both light and dark (or mixture) backgrounds.
I have created actions that will add the watermark to my photos

 

[Designer]

I would like to use my name and I would like it to blend in more with my photos..

Realistically, as others have pointed out, just putting something across your image that makes it difficult to remove will not PREVENT anyone from stealing an image.

The best reason I can think of to place some identification on your image is to help prove your case if and when the case is adjudicated.

Another good reason to put your mark on your photographs is for advertising purposes, in which case I would advocate for putting your contact information on there. Name of business, locale, phone, and e-mail is what I would put on. In fact, if there was a way to make it a hotlink to your website, that would be even better.

 

[vfotog]

Hello all!

Recently I have started to watermark my images, as they are going on popular websites. Many people told me that my watermark is incredibly bold and stands out way too much. I would like to use my name and I would like it to blend in more with my photos.

Here is one of the photos with the obnoxious watermark.
Subie Flickr - Photo Sharing

How can I go about doing this? I used the default watermarking technique from Lightroom 5. Any information would be awesome!

Thank you all.

it seems that people here are all telling you this isn't bold and I agree. It's small and understated. I'm curious as to who were the people that told you there was a problem with these. It makes me wonder what their motivation was.

 

[TomOScott]

I watermark all my images, but I do it below the image. I'm not an event photographer, so there's no reason for me to put a big obnoxious watermark in the middle of the image. However, I do add a copyright strip to the bottom of all my images that are online, and that's for one reason -- I register my images with the US Copyright Office. The removal of a copyright notice allows me to collect up to an additional $25,000 in fines, plus legal fees, along with the statutory damage that come with stealing a registered image.