Photo Watermarking

[MaxPower]

Vote in the poll..Just to see how many would like this intergrater into their photos...

http://www.jetphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=33151

[seahawk]

I made 3 quick exampels how of it could be. Just to give you ideas.

[MaxPower]

The watermark needs to be able to cover part of the subject of the photo in order to render it nearly impossible to clone out.

Yes, But like the one posted by Dave in the page one, I think since that kind of location of that mark, it did really distract my view. since yuo first focus on a photo at the middle, and then look out from the center. Here it was placed in the cockpit area. I do think having a choice almost near the corners but still covering a part of the airplane is preferrable imho.

@ Stefan , I think ENTWURF1 is the one everybody is talking about...

Less fainted and maybe alot lower opacity would be awesome..

[atco]

I agree I found the one on Page 1 just a little too much.
The watermark I favour is a large one, low opacity across the main part of the image. The aim of the watermark should not be to stand out or dominate, but to prevent misuse. That's why its essential it covers the subject in some way as to render it far too much work to clone or remove.

Example 1 is the one, a little larger and much reduced opacity.

The other 2 could be cloned out in under 30 seconds.

Having it across the subject, however clearly affects the pleasure of he person viewing the picture.

But Stefan here's exactly what I am saying. The viewing pleasure will be non-existant for a photo that never gets uploaded because it cannot be watermarked !
I'm not going to watermark a BA A319 on approach, but a rotating BWIA A340 taken airside, you bet.

Who knows how many images have not been uploaded because the photographers do not want them stolen?

[Top_Gun]

The photo I linked on page one isn't mine, but a friend of mine. He is a professional photographer hence the heavier watermark.

The one I posted on page 2 is what I'm looking for, barely visible but across the subject that it would be a waste of time trying to clone it out.

Top Watermark is at 25%
Bottom Watermark is at 20%
Middle is at 10%


I suppose you could even go down to 5%, but I kind of like the middle option

[atco]

Liking the middle one a lot

[RingwaySam]

You could have it really faint so it's only just visible yet not ruining the picture for viewers.

[seahawk]

How about option 3, and you can change the position from 1-3.

[indian airlines]

1- Photogs who are concious of protecting their work feel confident of uploading images that otherwise would not be uploaded (Photog, site and viewer win)
3- Anyone who does not like viewing watermarks does not have to open the image, the photographer loses a hit, but I think most would prefer the protection than the hits
4- Lets be honest, only a minority are going to want to use this feature, I would be amazed if the site gets filled with thousands of watermarked shots

1 - There are plenty of photographers who upload pictures both here and on a.net. If they choose to watermark their pictures on both websites, for a mere $5 everybody will be able to see the watermark-free picture over at a.net. Yes, photographer and viewer win, but I think the site loses out, not much, just a little.

3 - Not only does the photographer lose a hit, but the site loses traffic too, for reasons mentioned in point 1.

4 - I think to begin with people will watermark their pictures left and right. Why? Because a jetphotos.net watermark will be a novelty feature, people not so conscious about their hits are going to use the watermark on all their photos for the "coolness" factor and the sense of officialness a "jetphotos" watermark lends the picture. However, after a while, it will become just another feature and I think photographers who are not too hit conscious will then stop using it.

All that said, I'm for a standardized watermark. I really like the style of watermark Dave showed above. I think the 10% (or even 5%) across the middle of the photograph doesn't really detract much from the photograph.

I don't really upload photographs, so treat my opinions as those of a viewer, and as a viewer, if the picture is worth opening, I will open it, watermark or not. I personally will not pay $5 just to see the same picture watermark-free over at a.net.

-Tanuj.

[shamrock105]

I have been reading this thread and have been getting more and more confused because it seems to be getting to a point where many different ideas are being put forward, all of which are possibly too complicated to implement.
For me the simplest way to handle this would be for it to be an optional extra which can be used as appropriate. But then it will have to be a standardised watermark which cannot be altered by the uploaders. It would also have to be very faint - all the examples i have seen in the thread are - imo - very distracting !!
No matter what happens, it is not possible for jp.net to please everyone, so some will be happy with the outcome, others not.
Make it optional and then everyone can decide for themselves

[MaxPower]

You could have it really faint so it's only just visible yet not ruining the picture for viewers.

I think Dave hit the right spot in his A-10 shot....

No matter what happens, it is not possible for jp.net to please everyone, so some will be happy with the outcome, others not.
Make it optional and then everyone can decide for themselves

We must not forget that thing also.

[Top_Gun]

Here is a new sample.

The top in RED is 5%
The MID is still 10%
HIGHLIGHT LET 30PT text



I would also agree that this would solely be optional by photographer at the upload point. By no means do I think all my pictures are worth this watermark, but there are many I would use it on.

Thanks

[MaxPower]

Link doesnt work..

Please remove the [/IMG] from the image-code..

[lmw]

I think Dave hit the right spot in his A-10 shot....

This is exactly what I'm talking about. What a distraction and it distroys a great image in my HUMBLE opinion.

ISH

[MaxPower]

^^Its obvious you dont know which one Im talking about..

I meant the one in the middle, not top or bottom. I like it.