Are Watermarks a Necessary Evil?
It is remarkable the number of my photos that I discover on blogs, tumblr, websites, desktop background websites and even in print.
The internet makes sharing images remarkably easy and I actually wonder how professional photographers survive and protect their work.
If you want to see the scope of your work select one of your best photos and head over to Google Image Search, upload it by clicking on the little camera in the search box and have Google search for it across the world.
One example I posted a few years ago is my frozen ivy photo. There are literally dozens of examples of it used in a range of different ways including a poetic video. (click on the thumbnail).
To this end I have decided to reinvestigate the dreaded watermark. I don’t particularly like watermarks on images but if it protects the work then perhaps they are essential.
I do particularly like the new Getty Images watermark so I thought something subtle in the same style might be worth considering. The problem is Lightroom doesn’t allow me to mix a PNG image file (for the gradient) and text. Therefore the PNG file has to also include the URL which then loses its sharpness when render and to be honest is also quite distracting. You can see it in use over on flickr.
Another form of watermark I am considering is the QR code (See top image) a simple square on the bottom right of the page that can be scanned to reveal copyright information or take the user to www.flixelpix.com
So, is the conclusion that the QR is the best of a bad situation or do I just live with the images being shared thousands of times on tumblr with no credit? All opinions greatly received.