Contents
It’s usually a game of compromises, any benefits have their trade-offs. Let’s explore the top pros and cons of watermarking images:
Advantages of watermarking your photos
Calling it “pros” might be considered an over-simplification. Watermarking images is sometimes a compromise, some photographers don’t want to do it, they (feel they) have to. But as we go through these, you’ll discover watermarks actually have their own benefits:
1. Partial theft protection
This one is obvious: depending on the type of watermark you apply to your images, you can prevent some of the people from using your images wrongfully. It’s not bulletproof, but it does get the job done most of the times, it’s a visual cue that you want to protect your rights.
AI tools have made it really easy to take watermarks out these days (not just through cropping or healing brushes as before), so the “watermark roadblock” is becoming smaller and smaller. So you’re just discouraging casual misuse of your photos.
2. Branding, easy identification & credit
As your images spread into the far corners of the Internet, they can have your logo and/or website URL embedded in them, promoting your photography brand and generating more traffic to your website.
Watermarks also make it easier for people to identify you as the creator of an image. In the digital world, images can quickly lose their connection to the original creator as they are shared and reposted on social media. A watermark ensures that your name or brand remains attached to your work, increasing the likelihood of receiving proper credit.
Depending on the type of photography you do, having a brand name on your photos can actually bring in more clients in the long run. Wedding and portrait photographers usually fall into this category.
3. Images look signed
On certain types of images, some clients actually ask the photographers to leave the images watermarked, they feel that the images have a more polished, “finished” look.
For photographers, this can also be a way to maintain a personal connection to the work, even after it’s left their hands. Just as painters sign their canvases, a watermark can be a modern equivalent that reinforces the photographer’s identity and pride in their work.
4. Getting more sales
If clients want high-quality, un-watermarked versions of your images, they have no choice but to purchase them directly from you. They can no longer simply get the images from your site and print them themselves. This practice not only protects your revenue (to a degree) but also maintains the value of your work.
5. Photo agencies do it
There are reasons big photo agencies like Getty watermark everything, so why shouldn’t you? Protecting your work makes sense when your income comes from it. You’re also signaling to potential clients and competitors that you take your work seriously.
6. It’s an age-old practice
Painters use to sign their paintings. In fact, watermarking is said to date back to the 13th century. It now serves as a modern signature, linking your work to a time-honored practice of marking ownership.
Disadvantages of watermarking your photos
1. They’re a distracting foreign element
An obtrusive watermark ruins the image’s composition and mood. But lets also step back a little. We’re talking about the cons of watermarks, not of ugly watermarks in particular.
Even a well-designed watermark, if not placed carefully, can detract from the composition and mood of the photograph. For many photographers, this compromise is too great, as it undermines the artistic integrity of their work. This can be problematic especially in fields like fine art or landscape photography, where the aesthetic quality is key.
2. Time-consuming
Regardless of what stage you are in your business, time is precious. Even if watermarking is just a checkbox away in Lightroom, it still requires some checking afterwards (not to mention manually positioning watermarks on each image, if you like to torture yourself like that). It might make sense to focus more on creating new quality images instead of worrying too much about improbable image theft.
3. No legal value
If you find your images wrongfully used for commercial purposes, you can (and should) take legal action whether or not they were watermarked. If you can prove you shot the images (and maybe have the RAW files), that’s what matters. The watermark likely does not improve your legal standing.
4. They can be removed or cropped
With AI tools or with very little Photoshop experience, people can quite easily remove most watermarks from images. For serious thieves, watermarking and disabling right-click-saving represent just small inconveniences.
For watermarks to be effective, they have to be larger and more prominent, which is too big of a compromise sometimes.
5. Less sharing
Watermarks are indeed free advertising, but people are less likely to share watermarked images on their social media accounts, out of fear it could be seen as promotional to their followers. That limits organic reach, an important trade-off these days.
6. Can look amateurish, cheap or arrogant
It obviously depends on how elegant and discreet you make your watermarks.
But they do sometimes convey a slight sense of arrogance: if you’re protecting the images so badly, then you must think they’re that good. This lacks humility, and some visitors pick up on that.
7. They might become obsolete soon
Many companies are working on better image recognition algorithms, so there might not be a need for watermarks at one point. These tools might allow photographers to track and claim ownership of their images without the need for visible watermarks.
What about AI?
AI technology is being integrated into watermarking processes, making watermarks more sophisticated and harder to remove (invisible watermarks that are embedded within the image’s data). This would make watermarking more effective as a protective measure, giving photographers more control over their images. Also, AI tools are surely being developed to track images across the internet, identifying where and how your photos are being used, even if they have been altered or cropped!
On the flipside, AI tools are becoming increasingly adept at removing watermarks from images. Sophisticated algorithms can now detect and erase watermarks with minimal trace, making it easier for individuals to use images without permission.
Overall, the rise of AI likely brings a smaller need for visible watermarks.
Further reading
- http://scottkelby.com/2010/i-can-remove-your-watermark-with-no-problem/
- http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/content/pros-and-cons-watermarks
- http://www.natezeman.com/gallery/watermarks/
- http://www.lightroompresets.com/blogs/pretty-presets-blog/8240641-should-i-watermark-my-images
- https://www.kpraslowicz.com/2012/10/08/what-if-the-masters-of-photography-used-horrendous-watermarks/
Takeaway
If you’re not in any of the extremes (either strongly to or against watermarks), you have the delicate task of finding a good balance.
You get limited protection and a tiny bit of branding, at the expense of aesthetics and share-ability. And AI threatens to make them obsolete.
Here are my tips to help you manage the compromises:
- Let the watermark be there to help with branding, but make it as tasteful & discreet as possible to not hurt your images.
- Use various tools to automate the watermarking process and save some time.
- Don’t rely on just watermarks for security, look into other copyright-protection measures.
- Accept the fact that you can’t prevent everything, your images could still get stolen sometimes.
- Revisit this subject in the future, more options are becoming available as we speak (digital/invisible watermarking, reverse image recognition etc.)
- And finally, if your images were already stolen, use the services of PhotoClaim to get your money back.
What are your thoughts? Anything you’d add to the list of PROs and CONs?
