can somebody Photoshop the gettyimage out?
Selfbump
>>48949
youre not implying that the faggot in the pic looks cool?
anyway, thats an awful lot of precision work for free, doubt youll find takers here
seconding what that anon said.
here's a smaller version tho
>>48956
It's actually quite easy with heal selection. However...
>>48949
I'd do it for you, OP, but I'd rather advice you against it. Unwatermarking is extremely illegal - people have been fined 150k and gone to jail for 5 years for publicly using unwatermarked images.
But if you're just gonna use it privately, I could give it a go.
>>48959
yeah I'm not planning on publishing it, just need a new wallpaper
>>48962
OK. But you've been warned.
>>48964
I was actually talking about the whole thing including the grey box..
>>48965
Well, fucking say so then.
This was also a quick fix. Just duplicated the thing and grain merged it with the background. Some garbage was left on the borders though, because the image quality is shit, so I saned those bits with the clone tool and the heal selection filter.
>>48970
this will do mate, thank you so much
>>48974
np
Remove kebab.
>>48959
Some cunt went to prison for five years for using a photo?
>>49012
DMCA is a bitch, and it's pretty obvious some butthurt photographers were involved in its draft.
And I think it's been a few of cunts who went to prison for photo, not just one.
>>49012
It's always been unlawful to just copy someone else's shit; that's got nothing to do with the DMCA.
The thing about dewatermarking is that it makes it very very difficult to establish to the court that your infringement was anything but wilful.
There's a term used in law: "res ipsa loquitur" - the facts speak for themselves. If you removed a watermark from an image, then it speaks for itself that you knew who you should have paid for the image, and any attempt you make to claim that you made a good-faith effort to track down the owner and pay him is not going to get very far.
