So I'm considering a watermark even though I hate them. How does one avoid looking like a bored housewife on pinterest?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh Photographer Nate Zeman Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 700 Image Height 466 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2011:08:08 03:06:23 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 700 Image Height 466
add a border to only one side of the image, like the bottom, put your watermark on that
http://www.davidkennardphotography.com/blog/838-why-im-now-using-watermarks-on-my-photos.xhtml
Wow, I think this is the first time in years I've come to /p/ for advice, and in a quick time gotten an honest and reasonable response.
Thank you for not being an autistic shitchild.
>>2799461
use mspaint and put it in the least detailed corner of the photo.
>>2799461
>So I'm considering a watermark even though I hate them
Why?
>>2799461
bump for interest
>>2800825
cry some more faggot. if you don't want it stolen, don't post it.
>>2800825
>I've started noticing my stuff being reposted. Most people who repost it directly give credit, but by the second or third people dont.
So? What are you missing out on? Were you otherwise selling the images? What will the recognition gain you?
>>2799467
Mah niggah
there are 2 things i suggest:
1.) Make the watermark interesting, catchy and SUBTLE. Its as easy as your initials with a line under it, or a web address if need be. Then, you need to be subtle. Put them in the corners of your photo, with the opacity at around 20-40%.
2.)I suggest only doing them for professional gigs only. like portraits and wedding photos that are posted to facebook. That way, when the brides girlfriends share the ever living fuck out of them, people know who took the photos right away. DONT use them on your other ametuer shit, it only makes you look even more pretentious and snobby.
>>2799461
There's a plugin for GIMP called Fourier Watermark (included in G'MIC) that makes a 100% invisible watermark, that can still be decoded even after JPEG compression takes place. See http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-1581962.html
Basically, first apply the effect Fourier Watermark to add the watermark, and then to decode it, apply Fourier Analysis.
>>2802474
This is one of the dumbest objections imaginable.
Subtle works well, just don't be like this jackoff.
Whatever it is, the text needs to pop your site/you when searched if you want it to be effective in getting your name out there.
>>2799461
Watermarks are to make money. If you're selling your ability to take the photos, put them on your website/portfolio without watermark. If people steal them, who cares. You're advertising your skills, not the photo, and someone taking the photo who can't reproduce it does them no good other than getting them a few views.
If you're selling the photo itself, then it shouldn't be up on social media in high res anyways, but if you're doing it on a site with sales, a simple "Sample" or whatever across the front is plenty.
>>2803225
>If people steal them, who cares. You're advertising your skills, not the photo, and someone taking the photo who can't reproduce it does them no good other than getting them a few views.
Wrong attitude...it's not a matter of them getting a few views, it's them getting a few views that's not in some way advertising your site. You want people to share your shit with your watermark because that means more people are seeing it.
>>2803228
>advertising your site
for what purpose?
>>2803230
Recognition, business, or just whatever reason you created the site for in the first place.
>>2802474
Well, people asked about the shots and the client's product. Having a watermark to direct them to a website seemed like a better way to let them know than chasing down individual questions.
But hey...I'm the kinda guy who enjoys seeing other photographers/modles/clients succeed instead of coming to /p/ to shit on everything because I'm too incompetent to discuss things like an adult, you smug asshole.
>>2803223
>Should this post be reported or a 2.61MB image file? I'm neeew here guys but doesn't the sticky say 1MB file size limit??? This is killing my dial-up
