My Watermark - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/07/2007 09:59:21 PM · #1

i made my watermark tonight....how is it?feedback please? is it too easy to remove? or hard to remove?

TechnoShroom

Canon EOS-30D

04/07/2007 10:06:08 PM · #2

Too large in my opinion.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/07/2007 10:07:06 PM · #3

thats the point...to prevent being stolen....it doesnt ruin the actual photo tho cuz its in the bottom

TechnoShroom

Canon EOS-30D

04/07/2007 10:07:30 PM · #4

Originally posted by Jib:

thats the point...to prevent being stolen....it doesnt ruin the actual photo tho cuz its in the bottom

I would disagree.

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

04/07/2007 10:09:45 PM · #5

you disagree that it is hard to steal? its transparent so you can still see the shot...even if it is stolen they will have to either, ruin the shot, or give me free advertiseing

TechnoShroom

Canon EOS-30D

04/07/2007 10:13:16 PM · #6

It doesn't prevent image theft though if taken, as you said, it may provide free advertising. I do think it detracts from the shot it is placed on to a great extent and doesn't lend a professional appearance though that may not be what you're after.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

04/07/2007 10:14:56 PM · #7

That's a good watermark. It's not too much and it isn't the easiest one to remove. Just FYI, it took me 8 minutes to remove the one of the bike. If you like to see it let me know and I'll post it.

Beautiful-Joe

Olympus Stylus 770 SW

04/07/2007 10:23:03 PM · #8

I personally think that almost any watermark can be removed with a patch tool.. I've not yet found one that couldn't.. But I can't think of anyone who would want an image so badly that they'd go to the trouble. the original owner always has a way of proving their ownership. I think it looks fine.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

04/07/2007 10:28:52 PM · #9

Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:

But I can't think of anyone who would want an image so badly that they'd go to the trouble.

That's the thing. It isn't any trouble.

Beautiful-Joe

Olympus Stylus 770 SW

04/07/2007 10:35:19 PM · #10

>.< True..
But the original owner could still prove them wrong.
..Well, most of the time.

Shadowi6

Nikon D200

Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX-DC HSM

04/07/2007 10:46:54 PM · #11

to me it looks like a stain that should have been avoided when taking the photo. My guess thats what potential buyers would think first too. Particualy if they saw the bike one first.

Message edited by author 2007-04-07 22:47:20.

Dirt_Diver

Nikon D3s

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

04/07/2007 11:08:32 PM · #12

Here was my short and fast attempt to remove your watermark. If I actually took time on it I could make it look as if you just took it. BTW this is also how old pictures are restored. If you want to protect your images you need to add a "watermark" to the actual file, not the image.

Your other picture would have been much much easier. All I would have to do would be clone the other side.

Message edited by author 2007-04-07 23:10:32.

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM for Canon

04/07/2007 11:12:16 PM · #13

Hows this for removal..... hey and thank god for technicolor.

Message edited by author 2007-04-07 23:21:19.

Ubersteiny

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

04/07/2007 11:16:24 PM · #14

i went through this where i'd start to mark all my photos. but its too much work and no matter what i think it detracts from photos. the easiest solution is dont put photos larger than 800px on the large side on the internet. That way if someone takes it theyd most likely be using it as a desktop or something, and personally, i'd just take it as a compliment.

04/07/2007 11:18:01 PM · #15

Originally posted by noisemaker:

Heh even 640x480 is good enough for a 4x6, while you wont be getting 300 DPI a good resize and a good photo printer the 150 DPI of file resolution will be enough after print. 800x600 can make a 8x10 but you can tell.... can make a damn good 4x6.

Message edited by author 2007-04-07 23:18:35.

04/07/2007 11:24:13 PM · #16

well what i tried to do is get it to creep onto the image a little so that it is VERRY hard to clone out...for instince notice how hard it was for him to do the tires

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

04/07/2007 11:24:53 PM · #17

rain motorsports..i have no idea how you freaking got the color back into it...you must have some uber photoshop hax

Louis

Nikon D800

04/07/2007 11:28:08 PM · #18

Originally posted by Jib:

well what i tried to do is get it to creep onto the image a little so that it is VERRY hard to clone out...for instince notice how hard it was for him to do the tires

Maybe he's not that good. ;) Just kiddin'. A watermark is usually thought of as an invisible digital watermark that survives copying to and from various websites. I think the reason you don't see a lot of watermarks here as you've made them (and indeed, you hardly see them anywhere, even on the online gallery photos of pros) is because they're ghastly. :) They really do detract, and prospective clients in particular may be put off.

04/07/2007 11:34:40 PM · #19

Originally posted by Louis:

Originally posted by Jib:
well what i tried to do is get it to creep onto the image a little so that it is VERRY hard to clone out...for instince notice how hard it was for him to do the tires

Maybe he's not that good. ;) Just kiddin'. A watermark is usually thought of as an invisible digital watermark that survives copying to and from various websites. I think the reason you don't see a lot of watermarks here as you've made them (and indeed, you hardly see them anywhere, even on the online gallery photos of pros) is because they're ghastly. :) They really do detract, and prospective clients in particular may be put off.

Theres a high quality scan of the new 20 dollar bill and no matter how u copy it weather its screen shot, transfered between 400 different formats. When you print it it prints half and then a link to the treasury department.

(Not to mention photoshop CS2 has countermeasures against printing scans of money)

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

04/07/2007 11:43:35 PM · #20

Hey Louis to further support what i was talking about. Took a high res medium quality 20 scan from the internet. I dont have the good one that i used to but i cropped the front and then hit print.

Older versions still have printing issues but only on the print.

Goes to this site, same site that printed on the paper 2 years ago - //www.rulesforuse.org/pub/index.php?lang=en

This was the sample used - //www.crescentcitycoinclub.org/clipart_and_photos/20%20dollar%20bill%20new%20-%20front%20&%20back.jpg

Message edited by author 2007-04-07 23:45:25.

asimchoudhri

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

04/07/2007 11:58:25 PM · #21

Originally posted by RainMotorsports:

This was the sample used - //www.crescentcitycoinclub.org/clipart_and_photos/20%20dollar%20bill%20new%20-%20front%20&%20back.jpg

printed fine for me... let's go get some drinks, i'm buying :-)