watermarks/signatures

[redls1bird]

Hey guys. Ive noticed while looking through alot of these great photos that tons of you have added your name to the pic. Do you do it for protection or your images? Or is it just recognition? We are all to aware that they can be cropped out or "erased" with one of the many editing programs widely available. Also, is it worth your time for an amateur to brand their work?

 

[Alex_B]

Hey guys. Ive noticed while looking through alot of these great photos that tons of you have added your name to the pic. Do you do it for protection or your images? Or is it just recognition? We are all to aware that they can be cropped out or "erased" with one of the many editing programs widely available.

Recognition, and if I place a copyright symbol there, then my work is marked as copyrighted. Whoever removes it, does so on purpose and can be declared evil in my little world

It is true, who really wants to steal an image, can always do so. But if he has to crop, you can easily prove that it is yours, as you have the larger, uncropped version of the image

Before I did add my name to my images, I found them sometimes on other webpages, where people put them because they did not know about copyright and all ...

Also, is it worth your time for an amateur to brand their work?

I use picture shark to do it... does not take any time ... just do it as a batch job to those 5000 images in one go

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Putting a © on an image is a bit of a waste of time - and a bit of a pose too*.
Under International Copyright Law you automatically have the intellectual copyright to a picture the moment you take it. Putting a copyright mark or not on the image does not change this fact.
It is also true to say that if someone is going to steal your pictures or use them without permission then they will do so whatever you do.
And the chances of you finding out that it has been done are very small, and of successfully suing them in Court even smaller.
If you are seriously worried about copyright protection - especially if you are selling your pictures, then it is worth checking out Digimarc. You can get a plug-in for Photoshop.
http://www.digimarc.com/mypicturemarc/


*You think that your pictures are so good people will want to steal them?

 

[Alex_B]

Putting a © on an image is a bit of a waste of time - and a bit of a pose too*.

well, it reminds people not aware of copyright. many people are not aware of international copyright. and many people steal images without knowing it is not a good thing. the web is full of ignorant uninformed people.

*You think that your pictures are so good people will want to steal them?

those images that WERE stolen from me, were actually poor in both quality and composition

the only images i ever got published weren't my best ones either!

people do not want good images!!! it is only us photographers worrying ... unfortunately

 

[Hertz van Rental]

well, it reminds people not aware of copyright. many people are not aware of international copyright. and many people steal images without knowing it is not a good thing. the web is full of ignorant uninformed people.

If people are not aware of copyright or connected issues then they will not understand the meaning of © or the term 'copyright'.
If they do understand it then there should be no need to remind them.
In both cases the © is redundant.

The real world is full of ignorant and uninformed people, I think you'll find. :mrgreen:
The internet is full of juveniles who think they are anonymous and so can do what they like with impunity and anything that appears on the internet is theirs to take. The sad fact is that in general they are right.
My advice is: if you don't want your images stolen then don't put them on the internet.

I had quite a few people breaching copyright by stealing my work during my professional career. I actually found one instance of someone using an image of mine in a publicity campaign that they had scanned off a book cover!
My attitude is that it's a waste of time and money pursuing these people. If you do nail one they just go out again and steal someone else's images to make the money to pay the fine. As long as I have been paid to take the picture in the first place then my bank manager is happy and so am I.

The funniest instance I came across was when I was interviewing applicants for College. One had a folio with 'published' work in it. I was particularly interested in two images and asked him how he did them. His explanation was fascinating. And in recognition of his bravado I waited until the end of the interview to tell him that those two particular images were actually taken by a friend of mine.
Then I told him not to worry too much about it, but that he should be more concerned with the fact that two more of 'his' images were taken by me and I now knew where he lived.

 

[Alex_B]

The real world is full of ignorant and uninformed people, I think you'll find. :mrgreen:

finally something we both totally agree on :mrgreen:

 

[Chicagophotoshop]

I use picture shark to do it... does not take any time ... just do it as a batch job to those 5000 images in one go

would you mind showing me how to do that. I just dl'ed picture shark. not sure I need to put a copyright on the photos but I would like to see how it works and what it looks like

 

[Alex_B]

would you mind showing me how to do that. I just dl'ed picture shark. not sure I need to put a copyright on the photos but I would like to see how it works and what it looks like

hmm, not sure if I am good at explaining this online!

first you need an image (jpg) with your watermark. should not be to large.

The rest isn't that complicated, you have a directory with the source images .. and you should have prepared an empty one for the target images. where exactly is the problem? PM me if it does not work.