Funny Water Marks to Add to Photos

Canon versus Nikon. Full frame versus APS-C versus Micro Four Thirds. Sony versus Anybody Else. Original Equipment Manufacturer versus Third Party. We all know the world of photography generates a lot of countless debates that circle the Web. Some other source of passions and opinions is: The Watermark.

Watermarks

How do photographers sign their fine art? Painters normally paint their signature, initials, or pseudonyms on their canvases equally a final affect to their paintings. Nonetheless, photographers never really had a way to "sign" their images, with the exception of a watermark.

Before the digital world, publications and organizations would use print stamps on the dorsum of images to identify the sources of the images. Some even used embossing seals to leave raised marks on the print.

Versions of the watermark were besides the province of the commercial photographer, who would send a customer watermarked proofs, or prints marked with "PROOF" to select the images he or she wanted as final prints. These watermarks or proof marks were minor enough so you could still see the paradigm, simply you wouldn't want to frame the watermarked picture or give ane of the wallet-sized proofs to your friend.

Photographs © Todd Vorenkamp

This is a proof.

Technically originating in the art of papermaking, in photography, the watermark is a superimposed image, logo, or text placed over a photograph—unremarkably as a method of identifying the prototype's creator.

Why watermark?

When digital photography arrived, so did the ability to easily "steal" photographs from websites, as well every bit past other ways. "Wow—that is a beautiful photo!" Right click. Relieve to desktop. Or, save as wallpaper. There are occasions where struggling photographers used the art of others to promote themselves on their own websites or, given sufficient digital resolution, with printed images. The thought was that the digital watermark would forbid this.

At that place is besides a marketing facet to the watermark. Making your work easily identifiable might assistance viewers find y'all and more of your work, peculiarly if information technology gets shared around the Spider web.

And, for some, the watermark is simply a style to "sign" their art.

Why not watermark?

For those trying to preclude image theft, the watermark might be a adept example of keeping honest people honest. There are and so many ways to suck an paradigm off the Web these days that, if someone wants your paradigm, they will find a fashion to have information technology. And, if they really desire to merits your prototype every bit their own, in that location are ways, some painstaking, to remove watermarks, or one could merely crop out that section of the pic. Ultimately, the watermark offers limited success for theft prevention. If you lot don't want someone to steal your digital prototype, the best mode to prevent that is to not put it on the Web.

I prefer this photo without the watermark, only there are worse examples out in the world.

Also, equally painful as information technology is, there take been a lot of cases of image theft in the recent past where the thieves were brought to court, but not to justice. If the unauthorized use of your photograph ends upwardly generating financial gain or fame for someone else, you take every right to be upset and phone call them out on their inexcusable behavior, but if they can convince a judge that they "repurposed" your art under the Fair Use provision of copyright police force, you lot volition likely be left on the losing terminate of the argument with steep legal fees.

The marketing statement is a strong one. Adding something to your images to make them quickly identifiable every bit yours may take its advantages. Not all of united states are famous and not all of us have photographic styles that are immediately identifiable to the masses. Honestly, with the number of images created in the globe today, we could surmise that fewer and fewer photographers will create a style and then unique that non-artists readily identify their images. More common these days are comments similar, "Nice photograph. That looks like the work of So-And-So." That is awesome if you lot are So-And-So, but few of us are.

Watermark advice

There are certainly pros and cons to watermarking your images. If yous chose to watermark your photographs, here are some pointers to consider.

i. Give thought to your watermark. Typing your proper noun in the default Photoshop font might non be advantageous to your piece of work or your brand. Some photographers create logos and some merely reproduce their own signatures. The options are endless, but, as y'all are almost to mark upward a beautiful photograph that took a lot of endeavor to create, be sure to put some attempt into the design of your watermark.

Unless y'all absolutely adore "common" typefaces, like Comic Sans, you might want to avoid them. There are more than professional-looking typefaces for your watermark. This one is besides a fleck big.

2. Size matters. You want the watermark legible, simply not overwhelming. We have all seen watermarks on images (Instagram comes to listen) that are so small they cannot be read—this negates the whole purpose. Many of us have also seen watermarks so obnoxiously big that you cannot tell what the prototype underneath looks like. Pick a conservative size.

No, this isn't the TRVphoto.com Tower. That is a horrible watermark. No ane is going to steal this prototype, just no ane is going to like looking at it, either.

3. Does the watermark create a new focal signal? How do you immediately know that an prototype you lot are viewing has been watermarked? Well, because your center likely went straight toward that one chemical element that looks similar it doesn't vest in the photo—the watermark. If you add a watermark, particularly if done poorly, you are adding a focal point to the prototype. Give that even more thought. Yous might take advisedly equanimous a pleasing image, but the watermark, fifty-fifty a small 1, might take the viewer'south heart on a journeying you never intended.

Sky, clouds, mount, and watermark. One of those does not vest.

Will it assistance your brand?

The watermark might help your make. It might too ruin your images while trying to protect them. A watermark might exist the fashion you choose to sign your art. And, the watermark might be an effort to make life more difficult for those wanting to use your images for their own purposes.

Some well-known photographers use watermarks. Some practice not. There is no right or incorrect on this issue. The use of a watermark is completely at the discretion of the artist.

What are your thoughts on watermarking photographs? Please chime in with a annotate, below, to let u.s. know.

cravenmosencestiss.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/tips-and-solutions/pros-and-cons-watermarks-photographs

Share this post