watermarks, protecting images on the web, etc.

[Celebration]

I decided to open up a thread on this because I was hoping for a little more input on this subject than what we were getting in the discussion thread on the pinned post with our websites. In my SmugMug site, I was able to turn off downloading capability for my photos, and add right click protection, so I didn't bother with watermarks. But, maybe I should have. Any thoughts? Here are the various SmugMug accounts. It looks like they won't add a custom watermark in my "Power" account.

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/photo-sharing-features/

Alameda apparently is currently on a photo website where you are not able to turn off download capability or have right click protection. I don't really know if that is common or not. In any case, she wants the ability to watermark photos without buying Photoshop. Apparently it can be done with Gimp. Does anyone use that software for watermarks? Does it have the capability of batch watermarking? Would you have to import all the photos into the software and then watermark them? Can that be done in batches? Plus I guess you would want to save both the watermarked and unwatermarked versions, right?

I am also not sure what sites will a. allow you to turn off downloads, have right click protection, or b. watermark your photos in batches, just for use on that site. It looks like the pro account of SmugMug will do that, but not any of the others.

Obviously, unless you put one of those ugly watermarks all over the photos, anyone can copy them using printscreen, and cut off the watermark, but at least the size wouldn't be big, and it would stop the honest people from doing it.

These are really a few different topics I am addressing--

software for making watermarks that are free or at least cheap
batch watermarking photos free or at least cheap
photo websites that will batch watermark photos for people
photo websites that will turn off downloading capability and add right click protection

I know very little about all this, and would like to know more. All I know really is what I did, and that is right click protection.

[Alameda]

1. Thank you Celebration

I have downloaded GIMP and will start learning it. I'll also look into the Youtube tutorials. I think Alfredo mentioned he uses it.

[Stevenmarc]

2. Great topic

And a complex one considering everyone's needs are different.

Personally I'm not a huge fan of visual watermarks and I feel they offer as much protection as taking your shoes off in the airport. When they are plopped in the center I don't even bother to take more than a passing glance at the image and when they are in the corners they can just be cropped out or easily removed with context sensitive fill.

I prefer invisible watermarking where you imbed a digital signature in the image which doesn't interfere with image integrity and allows you to follow your work wherever it shows up on the net.

http://www.digimarc.com/m/digimarc-for-images/professional-edition

[Celebration]

3. thanks, it IS complex

I totally agree with you about watermarks in the center of the picture!! And I don't like big ones either. I know they don't protect from dishonest people since they can be cropped off, but it at least reminds the honest ones............

I had never heard of invisible watermarking! That is so interesting. Have you tracked any of your images to other places on the web? I am really curious about that.

I do remember one person here seeing one of her images someplace else. She was able to at least get credit for the photo after she contacted the web page. (They also gave her the option of having it removed.) But I think she just happened to see it. I don't think it was watermarked in any way.

[Stevenmarc]

4. Fortunately

I have never had an instance of commercial usage but I have had a couple show up on other websites and in those cases I've simply asked to be credited or remove it and it's never been an issue.

[Alameda]

5. Digimarc is expensive and is a subscription.

but it does offer a interesting service. It has to be renewed every year.

[Stevenmarc]

6. It really all depends

Where you are in your photography. If you love it as a hobby $99 a year probably isn't worth it but if you are actually able to monetize your work, $99 a year to basically LoJack 2000 images is not only pretty cheap but a smart investment.

But that's the point of this thread, there really is no one solution. I also think you have to be smart about what you post and where you post it and also think about the lowest acceptable image quality as strategy, one of the few times I embrace the concept, good enough is good enough.

[rdking647]

7. aperture 3.0 on a mac will watermark images