Watermarks and Photo enhancing

[Sgdevilzz]

Hello again guys.

Im not asking how to do watermarks or photo enhancing. But is it really necessary? Im not sure if "watermarks" is the right word to use. Example, "Peter Photography" that kind. Do you put it in your portfolios?

Another thing, Photo enhancing can really make photos look more beautiful, but it can make it look fake too. What do you guys think?

 

[qwerty628]

Watermarks imo is personal preference. If you don't mind some random person taking your photo of the net and using your photo without permission, by all means go ahead leave out watermark. Its really a copyright issue. By leaving out watermark you are pretty much giving up exclusive rights for your image

Post processing is pretty much a must. If done properly, it should not look fake in any way. It should look great, not fake. If it looks fake, its overprocessed

 

[limwhow]

Hello, Sgdevilzz.
Yes, watermarks is the right word. And it is certainly not necessary.
Personally I do it most of the time.
My feeling is it is perhaps a matter of pride and ownership of the photo - be they good or not so good ones.

And definitely post-processing (photo-enhancing as you have aptly described it) generally make pictures better.
If taken to the extreme, the beauty becomes a little unnatural.
What do I think? Personally, my humble opinion would be - take the Middle Road. Moderation is the key.
Exceptions will be when one attempts to convey some artistic message.

 

[catchlights]

Recycling some threads.....


Why we need Post Processing?

What you think of Newbies and amateurs adding Photography watermarks?

Whats up with . . .

Protecting photos from misuse

Signatures on photos...

 

[wildcat]

Hello again guys.

Im not asking how to do watermarks or photo enhancing. But is it really necessary?

Nope, it's not necessary.

Im not sure if "watermarks" is the right word to use. Example, "Peter Photography" that kind. Do you put it in your portfolios?

Yes, I still use it, even though it's not necessary.

Err... what was the point again?

 

[Sgdevilzz]

Nope, it's not necessary.



Yes, I still use it, even though it's not necessary.

Err... what was the point again?

well i realize alot of people doesn't put watermarks. A good thing and bad thing? Copyrights and your name on it. What about the bad thing? uhh, use of wrong color for wordings may cause distraction?

 

[ahmad0420]

Here's my personal opinion (based on what i've learnt)

As said by limwhow and qwerty628, watermarks are for copyright issues and also for your pride as the person who captured the photo. It's good that people know who took that photo, so in case they need your service, they can find you. Copyright is another issue but not gonna say much, as in the tech savvy world now, no copyright can fully copyright your photo.

For post-processing, it's definitely part of photography. Your camera isnt a processing machine that let u make ur photo look nice in terms of color and tones, but they just take the simplest of photos, and it's best that u process them. You need to train to ensure the processed photos don't look unrealistic.

 

[Octarine]

Im not asking how to do watermarks or photo enhancing. But is it really necessary? Im not sure if "watermarks" is the right word to use. Example, "Peter Photography" that kind. Do you put it in your portfolios?

Same with chili in your meals: do it when you feel it's necessary / makes the dish better. Leave when not needed. When you print pictures for personal use / family / friends .. doesn't it look a bit strange to smack some "Peter Photography" into the image? Or would a very small name tag ("Peter, Jan 2010") in a corner be sufficient? Or does your family know anyway that it was taken by you?
For online posting I agree on a watermark as soon as the picture is big enough to be printed bigger than 4R. Everything else is too small to be really interesting for those who hunt images for free (illegal) usage. Again, your choice.

Another thing, Photo enhancing can really make photos look more beautiful, but it can make it look fake too. What do you guys think?

Oh no... I hear a dead horse being saddled - In short: do what you like and what you feel necessary. Some images must look 'fake' in order to be exactly in the way as it is necessary (hint: context and purpose define what is required)

 

[TroyP]

I don't find signatures necessary, unless you're concerned about people using your work without permission. Signatures/watermarks are good in a way that people know it's your work, self-promotion
Personally I want to use a signature, but it can be a hassle to apply it to every image. Lastly, I still cannot design a signature that i'm happy with, and i'm sick of changing - decided not to use a sig for now

 

[ovaltinemilo]

Some nice watermarks tell ppl who shot the photos...some ugly ones actually spoil the photos...

Anway, enhancement/pp is own taste...some like it fake, some like it reproducing the scene accurately...some cut and paste(cheat):bsmilie:

 

[farsidepack]

Just want to answer on this thread on my own opinion:
Watermarks: I do agreee to some of you mentioning about sense of pride. Even a non-professional photographer have the right to have sense of pride on their work. Same goes with the tradional art painter that they insert their initials on their work of art.
Post-processing: some people thinks that their photo is the best since they are not doing post processing. But if we remember its the same as the old days. The Dark room processing is the same as computer generated post processing their photo. They can play around with the colors, dodging and burning. Everythings to much.... or overdone... in a real life is not good.

 

[blaz7]

From my personal experience i think watermarking is important.

Here is what happened to me, i used to place small watermarks(WM) at corners of pictures so the WM does not draw attention away from the main subject. But a couple of months back, i was informed by my friend that my pictures are appearing on some other forum. I went to see for myself and found out that someone had copied down my pictures and placed their own WM over mine and claimed them to be theirs. Messages to the person fell on deaf ears, nothing can be done due to the nature of the forum and the people who uses it.

So what i do now is to lower the resolution of pictures i post to my Flickr, and place WM over my subjects, if the person does do it again, hopefully his own WM will make the picture look ugly.

I am angry not so much that my pictures are misused, my pictures are not worth much, maybe close to no value, but comments made about the subjects of my pictures are just disrespectful to them.:angry:

 

[TroyP]

I also found some of my model images used on another website.
Also, 1 of the model organisers here on CS used my picture to advertise a new paid model shoot. They did ask for my permission. Because of this, I stopped allowing people from downloading my images from Flickr, however it does not prevent them from copy/pasting the link I provide when I post them in threads.
Even though you can stop people from downloading from your flickr and other websites, nothing can prevent people from taking a printscreen and cropping it in photoshop

 

[shaoken]

Hello again guys.

Im not asking how to do watermarks or photo enhancing. But is it really necessary? Im not sure if "watermarks" is the right word to use. Example, "Peter Photography" that kind. Do you put it in your portfolios?

Another thing, Photo enhancing can really make photos look more beautiful, but it can make it look fake too. What do you guys think?

It's up to you.
Watermarks is a way to let people know it's your work.

Photo enhancing, also up to you. You think your images is ok, then no need to do and enhancing.

 

[Anson]

For me to put my watermark on shots taken by me means that I am happy to show that the pictures are taken by me.

I have also seen my fair share of cropping/removing/covering of my watermark by other photographers or GCW.

 

[Ferderico]

I would love someone taking my pics for their advertisements/print media/annual reports etc...

it would be a compliment and time to earn some money out of my pics..

 

[Anson]

I would love someone taking my pics for their advertisements/print media/annual reports etc...

it would be a compliment and time to earn some money out of my pics..

For printed media, they would be more careful to use stock images if needed...