To watermark or not?

[Cheesy]

Evening all,

I generally accept that I will get a certain amount of banter/criticism for posting images with watermarks:

First of all, as everybody else, I like the pictures. Who wouln't like pictures taken in such ideal conditions ? only a very very limited number of people have this opportunity; and one can notice that being in such position helps an awful lot to make beautiful pictures. I think most of us, being in the position of being able to sit in the back seat of a fast jet, would be able to take beautiful pictures such as these. Anyway, sharing them with the rest of us is very kind of you, of course, but I notice the watermarks are the biggest I have ever seen-not only here, but elsewhere too-... I understand why you are using them, but at the same time I can't help noticing they are a source for a big frustration ! The pictures are great, the sharing is thoughtful, but yet you share a glimpse of your pictures, a sort of "preview of them" with these huge watermarks... My personal opinion is that you could try remove the watermarks.. anybody trying to steal your work,which is unique, and use it elsewhere, would be easily and quickly recognized and exposed.
There are other members here who do a fantastic job : travelling to remote low flying areas, climbing hills, spending hours and days in the cold, and bringing back the most stunning and beautiful and amazing aircraft pictures I have ever seen... and they share them,in a very humble and open-minded way, no watermarks, (or so small )... these people are (according to me) the very best among us and they deserve my utter respect !
I only wanted to give my opinion on this subject. You have reasons to be proud of your pictures, O. K ! but I think you don't have to fear doing a little more sharing, by removing or reducing those watermarks... The immense majority ou us are honest people, you know that, and my humble opinion is that you should have nothing whatsoever to fear, from us.

Here a relationship is derived showing that photographer skill is inversely proportional to the presence of watermarks. The validity of this view can be argued, but I'd like to draw your attention to an incident that was noted by colleagues on Fox2.co.uk. A 'tog noted that some of his images had been lifted from the forum and used in an article in the North Wales Daily Post about low flying. The Daily Post was even selling the aforementioned images on its website. Since the issue has been highlighted to Trinity Mirror, the Daily Post have apologized to the 'togs in question and compensated them for the use of the images, pulling the article in the process.

My advice is straightforward; (almost) every image has a commercial value to someone, protect your images. The reporter in this instance will have been paid a fee for the article. Watermarks are not to everyones taste but they serve a valid purpose and given the quality of some of the images displayed here you are leaving yourselves open to the theft of your images.

This is just my personal view.

Best regards,

Cheesy

[Chris Procter]

In general I watermark my images and it seems to rub a good few folks up the wrong way... maybe a solution would be that those photographers that use such water marks add 'watermarked' in the thread title and those who dont like them dont have to look at them
as things are we get endless comments on every 3rd thread about the image being spoilt

a simple hint in the thread title would put and end to it instantly

my 2p

[pan trash]

Having had copyright issues myself recently concerning some reference photos I sent to a fellow modeller (for personal use only), who then sold them on to a third party who then claimed the copyright for said pictures I can fully understand why you watermark your photo's.

[chrisfg1]

With the photographic opportunities that you get I would carry on watermarking and hard luck to those who don't like it. Here's to a fruitful 2013 for you and please keep posting.

[Macc]

maybe a solution would be that those photographers that use such water marks add 'watermarked' in the thread title and those who dont like them dont have to look at them

I hope it never comes to this. Given the opacity of most watermarks I do not understand the fuss.

[onemac]

They are your images and as long as you adhere to any rules or restrictions that may be imposed by the RAF/MOD then you can present them any way you want. True, you are in a position that most of us are envious of but there's not one of us who wouldn't swap with you in a heartbeat so click away my man and keep sharing your pics amongst those of us who are humble and open-minded enough (according to me) to appreciate them - worry ye not about the rest

Al

[p6025]

They are your images and as long as you adhere to any rules or restrictions that may be imposed by the RAF/MOD then you can present them any way you want. True, you are in a position that most of us are envious of but there's not one of us who wouldn't swap with you in a heartbeat so click away my man and keep sharing your pics amongst those of us who are humble and open-minded enough (according to me) to appreciate them - worry ye not about the rest
Al

Agree 100% with Al. My 2p: Your images, your decision of what to show, how to present it and how to protect it. Anyone doesn't like that should jog on.


Paul.

[vortex003]

Evening all,

I generally accept that I will get a certain amount of banter/criticism for posting images with watermarks:

First of all, as everybody else, I like the pictures. Who wouln't like pictures taken in such ideal conditions ? only a very very limited number of people have this opportunity; and one can notice that being in such position helps an awful lot to make beautiful pictures. I think most of us, being in the position of being able to sit in the back seat of a fast jet, would be able to take beautiful pictures such as these. Anyway, sharing them with the rest of us is very kind of you, of course, but I notice the watermarks are the biggest I have ever seen-not only here, but elsewhere too-... I understand why you are using them, but at the same time I can't help noticing they are a source for a big frustration ! The pictures are great, the sharing is thoughtful, but yet you share a glimpse of your pictures, a sort of "preview of them" with these huge watermarks... My personal opinion is that you could try remove the watermarks.. anybody trying to steal your work,which is unique, and use it elsewhere, would be easily and quickly recognized and exposed.
There are other members here who do a fantastic job : travelling to remote low flying areas, climbing hills, spending hours and days in the cold, and bringing back the most stunning and beautiful and amazing aircraft pictures I have ever seen... and they share them,in a very humble and open-minded way, no watermarks, (or so small )... these people are (according to me) the very best among us and they deserve my utter respect !
I only wanted to give my opinion on this subject. You have reasons to be proud of your pictures, O. K ! but I think you don't have to fear doing a little more sharing, by removing or reducing those watermarks... The immense majority ou us are honest people, you know that, and my humble opinion is that you should have nothing whatsoever to fear, from us.

Here a relationship is derived showing that photographer skill is inversely proportional to the presence of watermarks. The validity of this view can be argued, but I'd like to draw your attention to an incident that was noted by colleagues on Fox2.co.uk. A 'tog noted that some of his images had been lifted from the forum and used in an article in the North Wales Daily Post about low flying. The Daily Post was even selling the aforementioned images on its website. Since the issue has been highlighted to Trinity Mirror, the Daily Post have apologized to the 'togs in question and compensated them for the use of the images, pulling the article in the process.

My advice is straightforward; (almost) every image has a commercial value to someone, protect your images. The reporter in this instance will have been paid a fee for the article. Watermarks are not to everyones taste but they serve a valid purpose and given the quality of some of the images displayed here you are leaving yourselves open to the theft of your images.

This is just my personal view.

Best regards,

Cheesy

Bear in mind that the various clone tools available are very powerful,and if someone is determined to use your image they will remove the watermark.I've seen examples posted before - just to highlight the fact that a watermark,however bold,is not a failsafe solution.

[TonyO]

The reporter in this instance will have been paid a fee for the article.

No, he works for the paper and earns a salary, only freelancers get paid in the way you say.

Here a relationship is derived showing that photographer skill is inversely proportional to the presence of watermarks. The validity of this view can be argued.

I would argue that there most definitely is, but as in all relationships, there are always exceptions to the rule.

[jdupons]

If most people don't find watermarks frustrating and approve of them, so be it .. The fear of having pictures "stolen" doesn't appear to me as being all that important , let me explain why .
When you post a picture here, it has already been downgraded a lot in order to fit in : size, compression... it is already far from being as good as the original, in several ways. It often bears a name, too, which may deter a few "thieves" who are not hardened "criminals"...
Bottom line :the question of why you post in the first place. Everyone has its own reasons .. mine and some other people's is this : " I had a very good moment, I saw a very interesting plane, I'd like to share that with people who didn't have this opportunity, who may be more than happy so see this plane/event ...so I'll post a picture, a very downgraded example of the original. Do what you want with it, I don't mind and I don't care. If you "steal " it and try to make money out of this relatively poor quality document , I accept the risk, and according to me, it is minimal ". On this thread, one incident or two were mentioned, for thousands and thousands of pictures published... no activity is risk-free, and no social group is "villain"-free...I find it doubly frustrating, to bring frustration to hundreds of "innocent" viewers,just to prevent ONE villain from doing his bad thing.
If one of my pictures or one of my infos were ever used elsewhere without bearing my name, ( and it happened here in France) this doesn't offend me, as I know the document is not top quality, I have the original, and/ or I accepted to publicize an info.
My favourite pictures on this forum are the ones taken of planes flying low level in Wales or elsewhere.. why ? from the ones who take them, they demand quite a lot of expertise, some physical achievements, a great deal of personal involvement, money, time, a difficult goal which had to be achieved through efforts of several kinds. "Per ardua ad astra" is the perfect motto for these... But of course eveyone has his own preferences !
To conclude I must say I'm a bit surprised that so many people "enjoy" having watermarks on beautiful pictures... but if this is a majority of people, as I already said, so be it ! I would be glad to hear from people who don't apply watermarks, though, they might have interesting things to say, too !

[BMrider]

I agree with Jdupons;

I don't use watermarks, I'm not bothered whether someone else uses them or not, its up to them, If some Welsh rag ran an article with my unauthorized image an invoice would be winging its way to them pronto, If I had watermarked the image its unlikely the said Welsh rag would have used it and I wouldn't have the opportunity to invoice them

There are many fantastic air to air and other aviation images around on the www with no watermarks, far more than with I would guess.



.

[Macc]

I agree with Jdupons;

I don't use watermarks, I'm not bothered whether someone else uses them or not, its up to them, If some Welsh rag ran an article with my unauthorized image an invoice would be winging its way to them pronto, If I had watermarked the image its unlikely the said Welsh rag would have used it and I wouldn't have the opportunity to invoice them

There are many fantastic air to air and other aviation images around on the www with no watermarks, far more than with I would guess.

It's not always as simple as winging the offender an invoice, not all companies will respond like that - some will try to be much more evasive. Do you really want to spend your own time fighting for your image/money?

[BMrider]

I agree with Jdupons;


There are many fantastic air to air and other aviation images around on the www with no watermarks, far more than with I would guess.

It's not always as simple as winging the offender an invoice, not all companies will respond like that - some will try to be much more evasive. Do you really want to spend your own time fighting for your image/money?

Yep ! Its my choice how I play it, nobody else's, and I disagree that companies wont respond, are you speaking with any experience?

[Duane Hewitt]

I often look at images and think 'that image would be nicer without the watermark', of course it would. However at the same time I realise the need for them to exist. At one of the Tac Blazes I was shown a portfolio of images by someone claiming these images were theirs, where 2/3 images then struck me as remarkably familiar. I could not say anything too much in protest as it was a good 6 months previous that these images were taken, however the amount of times I frequented the location during the exercise period and only a handful more people going there on days I was not, who either reported no shows or posted their takings from the day left a cloud of suspicion over this guys portfolio. Had I watermarked them, there would have been no doubt and may have almost certainly deterred the chap from passing them off as his.
I now also work at a unit that can provide rare opportunities for photography, so the unauthorised use of my photos is of concern.

[rattler]

I would have to agree with JDupons. To be honest, I only upload to Airliners.net who have strict copyright rules. I have never had any problems with anyone using my images without my written permission. I have been published in several publications around the world with all images credited to me along with Museums etc. I often get asked for permission to download images for other websites and for personal use. It all appears to work very amicably. As has been mentioned, a watermark can easily be cloned out- so why bother ?

Mick F

[toom317]

Hate them. If your worried about your stuff being nicked then don't post it.

[Zymurgy661]

i'd much rather see some quality images with a watermark (and being honest Cheesy's watermark really doesn't impact my enjoyment of his images) than not see them at all. I definatley wouldn't want a situation where people stop posting quality images because they are afraid of them being stolen and used against their will. Some people may be happy to allow their images to be used without express permission and but that doesn't mean that everyone holds that same opinion.

Also, i wonder how many people are more recognised by their watermarks than their forum names? Yes, simple watermarks in the corner of images can easily be cloned out, but they also act as a form of business card when looking at images. If you are posting across numerous forums/image hosting sites/social media then you may well be known under different user names. A consistent watermark makes you easily recognisable.

[Cheesy]

Slight thread creep I know, but when I applied for my 'licence' to take photographs within a secret RAF AAR/AT base in West Oxfordshire I signed to agree any photos taken on base were, and remain, the property of the MOD. Unless express permission has been granted by the MOD surely that also applies to interior photos taken of current MOD aircraft and photos taken from MOD aircraft?

Happy to be proved wrong, because they are stunning photos!

Regarding watermarks, why not? Chessy's photos, Cheesy's Rules...........

Look at the DIN that I've attributed my Flickr name to - the ownership of copyright is explicitly detailed there.

Regards,

Cheesy

[phil8561]

Cheesy they are your photos if you deem that watermarks are needed on them then so be it they dont detract from viewing the subject matter in my opinion. Take your Hawk T2 post, I was looking at the photos and didnt really see the watermark (which i do know is there).

And as you try and sell your photos to people you are protecting your work.

[page_verify]

Ah yes, the good old capitalist world working well. I don't mind you enjoying my hobbie with me as long as I can make a few quid from it etc etc.... If you're that worried about someone making money from your photos, get a full-time job as a photographer where you get paid regardless of whether your photo is seen once or a million times.