Watermark programs

[Wellhead]

Hi all,

Recently I saw some nice pictures on this
website with the names of the photograper
embbeded in the pictue i.e. Watermark.
Can you tell me if there I a program which
I can use to make a watermark.
I'am currently using Nikon Capture NX and
it is not equiped with a watermark function.


Regards,

Ronald

[Iwan Bogels]

Hi Ronald,

With Photoshop you can embed any watermark or image inside your photo. Just create a new layer, type the requested text / insert necessary image and then adjust the overall opacity of the layer to about 10 - 20 percent. Et voila, a watermark.

Cheers,
Iwan

PS: I think photos with watermarks are extremely ugly !

[planecrazy]

Hello Ronald,

Because your post is already a few months old, you probably have an answer already but you never know,

I use http://www.bordermaker.nl
It is very easy to use and you can batch process the images.

greetings

Robert

[Alpha Kilo One]

I agree with Iwan on this one.
Watermarks are extremely ugly.

You can batch your photos also with Irfanview.
I am not sure if that specific program can watermark with opacities between 10 - 20 %

Ronald

[Key]

Watermarks are extremely ugly.

Yes, they are.

Still, I think I will use them more often in the future. I do want some kind of protection on my photos when I put them online, even if it were just to avoid commercial users to grab some of my free pics in stead of paying someone for material. Someone who has to live off that, and provides the world with great photos. So far I have mostly used low resolution as a safeguard (800px max, high compression) but a watermark allows for much better display while still retaining a degree of protection.

Now a watermark is essentially something hardly visible, and that is how I use it. Many photogs though, use it more like a stamp and often even directly over the subject of the photo. That ruins it for me, they might as well leave out the photos altogether.

Example of watermark use the way I mean it:



It's there, but I think it gets noticed only after looking at what the photo is about. This will not work in every photo, but where it does I have come to like it as a form of safeguarding (which obviously never is perfect).

Wondering how others see this,

Erik

Edited for typo

[Richard from Rotterdam]

You could try to place a watermark in a spot of the picture which a "pirate" can't easily crop out of the picture, but which will not ruin the complete image. For instance looking at Erik's picture, if you place a small watermark with very low opacity in the grass between the wing and tail of the B747, it will hardly ruin the first impression people have of the photo, but the pirates will have to do quite some photoshopping to get rid of the watermark.

[kiwi]

You could try to place a watermark in a spot of the picture which a "pirate" can't easily crop out of the picture, but which will not ruin the complete image. For instance looking at Erik's picture, if you place a small watermark with very low opacity in the grass between the wing and tail of the B747, it will hardly ruin the first impression people have of the photo, but the pirates will have to do quite some photoshopping to get rid of the watermark.

I also think that's a better (still ugly) solution. Bars like Key has under it are very, very easily cropped out. It's even possible to record an action that crops out the lowest 5-10 or more pixels and run it through every 'stolen' image you've got. Not very theft-proof but it does make aware that the photo should not be copied without permission

[Iwan Bogels]

Example of watermark use the way I mean it:

It's there, but I think it gets noticed only after looking at what the photo is about. This will not work in every photo, but where it does I have come to like it as a form of safeguarding (which obviously never is perfect).

Wondering how others see this,

Erik

Hi Erik,

This looks good. As a matter of fact I didn't even notice the huge transparent "Airliners" watermark inside the photo itself, on first sight. My attention was drawn by the name banner below the photo. So this proves that a decent and nearly invisible watermark is very well possible. After all you only want to brandmark your image in a way that publishers don't even consider making unauthorized use of your photo, or be able to recognize your photo when you need it. For all other people you would like the watermark to be invisible, in order not to spoil its beauty.

So far I have only watermarked my photos on one occasion, when my (publicly visible) images were so hot that they could have been published in every magazine (Lybia AF MiG-25's). All other images that are intended to be published on paper are kept away from public view until the time is right to show them. In practice this can mean that it can take over a year before they are released.

Airliners is a place that does require watermarking, as their photos are exposed all over the world, and to many different media who require images for publication. Personally I have chosen to stay away from Airliners, as I try to arrange my own publishing

Sometimes I wonder about the true reasons for people to watermark their photo. I may hurt some people's feelings if I say that a lot of watermarked photos are nowhere near eligable for publication, and the watermark is only there to make a name. Nevertheless I do understand that people like to have their name attached to a photo, but if that is your goal, I would suggest to do it much more esthetical.

If people want to show their name with the photos, this is what I would like suggest:

- resize every photo that you want to publish online to the same size (let's say 900 x 600, for instance)
- create a standard image (let's say 1000 x 700, for instance) that can serve as a background / border. In this image you design your name, and whatever info you might want to add.
- Open the photo and copy it into the standard frame, and then save it as a new filename.

With Photoshop this proces can be done both manually and automatically. You will only need to design a beautiful border just once, and if you want to adjust the design it's pretty simple. There are also programs that provide you with standard borders which can automatically include a lot of data, like name, date, camera data, website, email or any combination. Just one touch of a button......

Arnold ten Pas has recently given valuable tips about borders in another thread. You may want to read his explanation and see his examples.

Just my thoughts,
Iwan

[Key]

Thx Iwan, and I agree with your reasoning.
@ Colin, you spotted it by now?
It's funny you thought I meant the bar, as it is in line with my view that many people seem to just think of a stamp or label when talking about a watermark, where it really is (or should be) a very specific and above all subtle mark.
Just for the record: I'm not trying to convice anyone to use watermarks, I just recently gave it a good thought myself and wanted to share that.

Erik

[kiwi]

Thx Iwan, and I agree with your reasoning.
@ Colin, you spotted it by now?
It's funny you thought I meant the bar, as it is in line with my view that many people seem to just think of a stamp or label when talking about a watermark, where it really is (or should be) a very specific and above all subtle mark.
Just for the record: I'm not trying to convice anyone to use watermarks, I just recently gave it a good thought myself and wanted to share that.

Erik

Yes I did, I totally missed the transparent text. Nice and subtle! And more important, functional!

[Key]

In reply to Iwan here:

Everything was done in Photoshop.
I do most of my processing with Adjustment Layers in .psd now, and store these at full size. I have a separate file with the watermark text in a single layer.

When finished adjusting the RAW, I duplicate the text layer to the photo file, where I resize and position it as applicable. The watermark layer comes below the adjustment layers, so future adjustment changes will apply to the watermark as well in order to preserve the way it blends in (next step).
I choose the text colour with the dropper, to make it blend in with the background. Should be visible but not disturbing. Then comes opacity adjustment, depending on the situation. The average is around 25% but 5% and 50% can be possible.
In some cases, I will copy a piece of the background to a new layer where I do not want the watermark to be on top of the subject (similar to the way the 'Scramble' titles of the mag can be behind a tail or whatever). The copy layer comes above the watermark of course, several examples are in the Greek shots.

Final step is 'standard' Action for web publishing: flatten, adjust colour space and depth, sharpen, save.
To sum it up, the manual part involves watermark layer insertion, positioning, adjustment of colour and opacity - plus sometimes copy-pasting part of the background. This leaves you with a file suitable for output at any size up to full, with or without watermark, and adjustable RAW processing. In case you wonder: I am still a Lightroom nono, I cannot tell if parts of this would work in that program. Some day I will know...

[Edit] Screenshot added for clarification.

Erik