Signatures on Photos

[desmondnwj]

Personally, I'm a fan of typography. I love the fact that with prudent selection and placement of types, it can really change the impression perceived by viewers. Bearing that in mind, I would refrain from placing signature on a photo as it kind of beautifies the photo and suppresses the original feel that it would otherwise radiate. Nevertheless, i understand that to the majority, it will "protect" the photos from misuse.

What's your take on placing signatures on photos?

[OldFlower]

Originally Posted by desmondnwj Personally, I'm a fan of typography. I love the fact that with prudent selection and placement of types, it can really change the impression perceived by viewers. Bearing that in mind, I would refrain from placing signature on a photo as it kind of beautifies the photo and suppresses the original feel that it would otherwise radiate. Nevertheless, i understand that to the majority, it will "protect" the photos from misuse. What's your take on placing signatures on photos?

I think it is over used.
Personally, I would consider placing a watermark when the image posted for viewing is of some quality and standard, or when I am a practicing professional photographer. By 'professional' I mean that one must be making a living fully as a photographer.

I've see so many lame looking compositions embelished with watermarks that looks better than the photo itself.

[entropy_h]

Originally Posted by OldFlower I think it is over used. Personally, I would consider placing a watermark when the image posted for viewing is of some quality and standard, or when I am a practicing professional photographer. By 'professional' I mean that one must be making a living fully as a photographer. I've see so many lame looking compositions embelished with watermarks that looks better than the photo itself.

I think what's more prevalent are lame looking compositions embellished with lame looking watermarks.

[giantcanopy]

Depends on the end objective of what the person is trying to display.
I would think an ideal watermark should first of all not disfigure the photo. But should not be impactful such that it bringings out a photo that cannot stand on its own.

Ryan

[desmondnwj]

Let's define some terms.

Watermark = semi tranparent (depending on the degree of transparency, i might accept it)
signature = solid color
-------------------------------

hmmm, i think i should give an example on what triggered me to ask my question.

let's say a landscape photo was taken. There's a lot of blank space (too much sky, too much sea etc.). To off set it, one may strategically place his signature in that space.

Original picture may be criticised for the hugh amount of blank space.
Same picture with signature may look perfectly good (or to that effect).

[giantcanopy]

Originally Posted by desmondnwj Let's define some terms. Watermark = semi tranparent (depending on the degree of transparency, i might accept it) signature = solid color

? Issin the act of embedding ur signature onto the picture a form of watermarking.
The watermark can be visible or invisible

Ryan