To watermark… or not to watermark?

By curiousillusion ( January 27, 2010 at 8:02 pm) · Filed under photography,

Some of you may remember my post on picture stealing, where I discussed having a picture that was used without permission or credit… and as a result, I started adding a watermark (semi-see through text with my name) on my pictures. I mentioned not being a fan of the watermark (I think it takes away from the picture), but I felt it was something I had to do, if only to discourage picture thieves.

Yesterday I got an email from a friend who is against watermarking, and he brought up some really good points that got me rethinking things.   I mean, I already knew this but – my watermark isn’t very effective. Anyone that really wanted to could photoshop it off…. although that’s why I put the watermark in the middle or critical part of the picture, to make it just a little bit of work to get rid of and at least act somewhat of a deterrent.  Whether it does or not, who knows. But the main issue with the watermark is: it really just ruins the picture.

The way my friend put it is this: if someone uses it in a way that they’re not making money, then what’s the harm?  And if they DO use it to make money, well that’s when I can “cease & desist” their behind.  And since right now I’m just taking pictures for flickr and blogging purposes, that’s my “audience”… I shouldn’t take away from my pictures by adding the watermark.

I don’t know.  I see all the different arguments in this.  And right now I can’t figure out what to do.  I guess just deep down it bothers me, really *really* gets on my nerves, when someone takes something that I worked hard on and doesn’t give me credit.  But maybe I shouldn’t care?  I’m no professional, they’re not making money off it… and I should be flattered that they liked something I did to begin with?

I have no conclusion to this post, so I ask… what do YOU think about watermarking?  Not just whether I should watermark, but do you watermark… and if so, why?  And if you don’t watermark, why not?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks

Related posts:

  1. The watermarking debate… continued. Thanks for everyone’s feedback on yesterday’s post, I really enjoyed...
  2. Confession Sigh. I feel guilty. Really guilty. Let’s start from the...
  3. Not everything on the internet is free for the taking. Aka, “stop stealing pictures!”  Or… “how do I know if...
  4. On facing debt. I’ve been trying to move out of my parents’ house,...

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

« « rejected from the project, not my heart| The watermarking debate… continued. » »
  • Hi Ari,

    Well I already commented on the other two posts, might as well go for the hat-trick. I have to say that I agree with your (wise) friend. In fact, before I was even aware of this whole debate, I actually made a reply to you on my blog, with a suggestion that you should just switch your license to Creative Commons ... and Encourage people to "steal" your pictures.

    This is just anecdotal, (no scientific studies to back it up), but I suspect that what you'll find, is if you actually make your pictures "available" for people to share, they'll be MORE likely to give you the credit that you deserve.

    As your friend pointed out, if someone is going to steal your pictures, they're going to steal your pictures ... regardless of how you license them, or what kind of watermark you do or don't slap on em. Instead of looking for ways to "stop the theft" (ala the big record labels with downloaded music), why not instead offset any theft by Encouraging more Attributed sharing?

    I think in the long run, you gain more through the second strategy ... ie, give it away, and worry later about how you'll get "paid"

    Just my 3 pennies ... hope it helps,
    Todd
  • I always watermark and I will admit, my watermark is in the lower left corner of my pictures so it's super easy to remove. I agree with Brian that watermarking is kind of like promoting yourself. Sure, someone could go through the work of removing it, but then again, that person is also probably trying to use it for malicious purposes. I have a big problem with people using my pics, even if they aren't making money off them. It takes a second to credit the photographer. If no harm is meant, why not do so. Photographers work so hard, often spending hours getting a shot and then even more time post-processing the photo. I want my credit.
  • I personally don't like watermarks. They don't prevent theft and in many cases detract from the image. Just my 2 pennies.
  • I'm a huge proponent of Creative Commons licenses (www.creativecommons.org), which makes it so that you can choose what kind of rights you retain (don't make money off this, attribute original creator, share alike, allowed to make modifications, etc.) to your images and pursue cease and desists if they violate the license.
  • To be honest, it's your call.
  • ari_b
    Hmmm.... that's a tough one. People will always find a way to steal. Always. Some people just have that nature.

    I agree with Brian Parton, that watermarking is a good promotion tool - if its small and in the corner and possibably a deturent to some would be theifs (esp. ones without photoshop).
  • While it's true that somebody who was really determined to steal your picture could do so with or without a watermark by photoshopping it off, I do think it acts as a deterrent - maybe for those who haven't quite gotten it into their heads yet that just because a photograph is on the internet doesn't mean it's free to use? (Hard to believe I know, but I've only really run into this with little kids hotlinking pictures from my domain to use on their Myspace layouts. Saying that, all my photos on Flickr are licensed under creative commons, because I don't think I'm at the level yet where people are going to want to use them for profit!).
  • I don't know really. It is totally right that you be credited for your work and as Brian pointed out, if someone uses it and it has your watermark on, it spreads your name as a photographer, which is pretty exciting! On the other hand, I totally agree that watermarks can ruin a picture. I think yours so far haven't been very obtrusive, they've still allowed us to get a good look at the photo.
  • I, too, have been kicking around the watermark concept. Partially because of copyright, but also for branding purposes (promotion, etc). I just haven't yet figured out the design.

    As Brian Parton points out, watermarking is also free advertising. Believe it or not, there are many people that may inadvertently steal your image - I say inadvertently because they just don't know, but don't intend to be hurtful - who will give full credit. But if they have it on their blog, they may not be interested in removing the watermark.

    That said, I really think you ought to check out Jim M. Goldstein's article: Evolution of a Watermark. Through the last few years, he went through a few iterations, and his current watermark is a great example of branding.
  • Foxymoron
    I don't watermark because any legitimate organization will contact you if they want to publish your photo. And as was pointed out earlier, if a person really wants to do so, it's really easy to get rid of most watermarks.

    I think you should do whatever you feel comfortable doing. If your photos rock people will come anyway. Besides, I'm almost certain you do it for you.

    btw, I'm still game for that trade!
  • mycognitivedistortion
    I'm all for watermarking. I don't know, just in case. Even if someone uses your picture and isn't making money, it's still yours and people will know that. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. Money or not... I don't know. I'm an only child so I'm spoiled. I like my things and mine is mine. ;)

    Kidding. I share well.

    usually.
  • I don't usually sign my artwork (on the front) because I feel it takes away from the piece, so I understand your concern. I think I'm with Quave on this, though. Come up with a watermark design that you love and place it somewhere inconspicuous. Anyone that's going looking for an image to use on their blog, or whatever, is going to see it. Hopefully they'll move on. I would have. Of course NOW I will always ask permission before using ANY image. ^_^
  • I don't think I would ever use watermarks on a regular basis but if I had a specific photo that I was concerned would be reused without attribution I would certainly marque it in some way.
  • I don't watermark, a lot of the time I see it and it looks tacky...but it would give you credit though...
  • writetoreach
    I'm not a fan of watermarks. I would never tell you not to be upset about something if you are and you have the right to protect your work, but I don't know that it's worth the trouble. I'm also not a photographer, so maybe there's a perspective on this that I don't understand.
  • Quave
    Well, I say that the point that your friend makes is true, but I don't think it's totally valid. As anything when it comes to security, there's always a way around it. Think about it. You can have a great alarm system on your car or house, but if anyone wants it, they can just chuck a brick through the window and take what they want.
    It's not about how easy it is, but about minimising the amount of potential successful 'attacks' on what you have.
    There's a high chance the guy that took your picture wouldn't have bothered, he would've said "ah, that's got a watermark, keep searching".
    You could compromise, and have a watermark that identifies you, but doesn't take away from the picture. Or go extreme, and have unwatermarked pictures with specific permissions, and a watermarked version made public.
    Now, your point about being recognised for your work is very valid. No matter if you do it professionally or not, it's just a matter of principle.
    Now, did I actually make any point?
  • CarissaJaded
    I don't know much about photography, or the rules behind copyright... but I say.. if someone uses your picture in a way that they are not making money off of it- what's the harm? Any exposure is good exposure, and hopefully they'd be kind enough to give you credit anyway. If not, you could do the cease thingy and then maybe get some cash out of it. But then again, with your watermark on it you KNOW you are getting the credit. So... yeah I'm not much help am I!?
  • Brian Parton
    Think of a watermark also as a way to promote yourself. You take photos of someone, offer it for their facebook page with a watermark and everyone who sees their photos also sees your name. It's not just about copyright infringement.

    Also, the argument about making or not making money is irrelevant. If they don't have the permission, they are wrong either way. That's like saying it's ok to steal your stuff, as long as they don't go try to sell it at the pawn shop. You work for your art, for it to be used anywhere without permission is disrespectful and wrong.
blog comments powered by Disqus