>>2870740
Kill yourself, kike.

>>2870740
are you seriously going to ask this on a photographer's board you piece of shit jew?

>>2870818
>>2871212

Spare us your sanctimony, faggots.

These aren't bespoke images created by a visionary photographer, they're run-of-the-mill jostens tier pablum cranked out by a walking tripod who earns maybe 12 bucks an hour and doesn't even own the images.

>>2871217
that doesn't change anything you millennial twat

>>2871217
oh so let's fuck with this man's livelihood who just wants to make an honest buck just because his work doesn't live up to your artistic standards?

>>2871238

What "man's livelihood?" You're talking about a giant fucking corporation that shoots photos for 2 million kids a year. Did you even read my post?

No, the same technique could be used on any watermarked photo so fuck you

if the picture is visible without watermark it's easy as fuck if you know how websites work. if you really want to know how to do it Grab a HTML book and read it. they won't tell you but you will know how to get them if you are Smart.
i personaly do that shit to read exif data. from awesome Pics. mostly the watermarked pictures are stripped of exif data.

>>2871350

Any watermarked photo deserves to get stolen.