![]() Most people I’ve encountered in my nearly 6 years as a full-time photographer don’t want my watermark on their lo-res photos. Lo-res images are the ones that are too small to print; they’re used for emailing, phone wallpaper, and for sharing on places like Flickr, Facebook and Pinterest. I’ve had people remove my watermark without…
March 14, 2013 - 6:54 am
Thanks for raising the awareness about this issue! I’d not really thought about how a watermark can protect clients, but so true. I used to not watermark, but I’m seriously considering it now after recently learning it gives you real legal leverage in court should an infringement case go that far. If your images are watermarked, the infringer can’t claim they didn’t know the image was copyrighted, especially if they removed the watermark. You can also seek higher damages for such cases. I would think that has to benefit a client as well.
March 14, 2013 - 10:29 am
Definitely, Joann. I shoot mostly families and their pets; I know those mothers don’t want images of their babies (often naked) going out into the ether of the internet with no protection. When I first starting shooting, we were all on Flickr and it was fairly small group. I wish I’d started using watermarks back then, but even when I did, i got huffing from other photographers who didn’t like it. ?? Watermark everything! ![]() Ok, obviously nobody was ready for this shot. Eleanore wasn’t ready; her mom Kat surely wasn’t ready, and I wasn’t ready, as evidenced by the total lack of framing. But a part of my brain saw this image before the other part said “wait, frame it and take it properly.” Maybe the impulsive… |
|


