After seeing this masterpiece of a photo nearly ruined by "AIRLINERS.NET" slapped across the subject, I have to wonder what principles the site uses in determining where to place a watermark.
First, I fully understand why watermarks are necessary. However, I think there is a lot of room between leaving the image entirely unprotected and dominating the intended subject of the photo.
Are watermarks deliberately placed, and is it possible to move it on photos like this? There are certainly more examples, many night photos, where this happens.
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- 45272455674
- Posts: 7732
- Joined:
Re: Tone-Deaf Watermarking
The watermarks have to be placed on the images in places like that because sadly some people cannot do the right thing.
If you put it elsewhere,someone will just crop it out.
The solution would be to have a watermark pattern across the entire image like some of the stock photo sites do. I have no problem with it, I can look beyond a relatively small watermark and see a great photo.
If you put it elsewhere,someone will just crop it out.
The solution would be to have a watermark pattern across the entire image like some of the stock photo sites do. I have no problem with it, I can look beyond a relatively small watermark and see a great photo.
Re: Tone-Deaf Watermarking
BWIAirport wrote:I have to wonder what principles the site uses in determining where to place a watermark
The site doesn't use any principles. Watermark location, size, and strength are determined by the uploader (who is the photo copyright holder).
BWIAirport wrote:After seeing this masterpiece of a photo nearly ruined by "AIRLINERS.NET" slapped across the subject
You know what's worse than "bad" watermark placement? Commenter after commenter complaining about it.
Watermark ruins the photo for you? Fine, go look at another photo.
(in this case, the uploader was nice enough to redo the watermark, but they certainly shouldn't have to)
-
- Silver1SWA
- Posts: 4881
- Joined:
Re: Tone-Deaf Watermarking
vikkyvik wrote:BWIAirport wrote:I have to wonder what principles the site uses in determining where to place a watermark
The site doesn't use any principles. Watermark location, size, and strength are determined by the uploader (who is the photo copyright holder).BWIAirport wrote:After seeing this masterpiece of a photo nearly ruined by "AIRLINERS.NET" slapped across the subject
You know what's worse than "bad" watermark placement? Commenter after commenter complaining about it.
Watermark ruins the photo for you? Fine, go look at another photo.
(in this case, the uploader was nice enough to redo the watermark, but they certainly shouldn't have to)
This instance was pretty bad though. I first saw the photo via a thumbnail on Twitter and was pretty shocked the photographer would go that heavy on such a beautiful shot. Totally understand why watermarks are necessary, but in this instance it totally killed the viewing experience to the point my initial reaction was why share it at all? Just my opinion.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests