Serious Bailey

comments . . .

Great portrait.

The huge proof mark "destroys" the impact as a photo.

I'd rate it higher without the proof mark.

I understand, it's just unfortunate we can't publish in a photographer's forum without defacing our photos to protect them.

Good portrait, but the light is a little flat IMO - and the compression seems to have been to much...

 

And I too feel that you've ruined your picture with your name all over it. If you really feel you have to do it, it can be done much more discretely than this.

It's a casual portrait (which is fine) but the light is a little flat imo and coming from the wrong side.

I'm from the old school that says that light should fall on the SHORT side of the face.

I'm also bothered by the copyright things.

I understand we should protect our work (I don't) but it's only lo-res jpg's and in a way it gives the picture a sort of 'over-rated' appearance.

 

Regards,

Rick

I understand why everyone dislikes the watermark. I myself am not fond of using it, but I have had some serious problems with clients take these photographs, copying and scanning them. They take these photographs off of my personal web site and this web site. I use to just put my initials in the corner, something very simple. Now because of other neglect for my business, I have had to take a more drastic approach. Now when my clients take my proofs to be scanned or copied, that place of business will not do it. The final ordered photographs do not have a watermark at all; yes, the client could take it and scan it, but now I am making some kind of profit before they do this.

Maybe we should ask for a "members only" attribute for photos, so that only members could see and critique certain photos. I'm quite disturbed, actually about the inclusion of the digital postcard option on this website, in spite of the statement that copyright is to be honored. I wish the default for that option were NOT to allow the digital postcard option.

Great picture mindy! I don't ever place a watermark over my images on this site not thinking that my clients would ever be on this site, but yet the other day one of my clients told me that she forgot my web address and just typed in my name and the link that came up first was was to my photo.net gallery. (my personal web site is copy-right proof) She was flattered to see the good comments that I recieved on one of her little boys pictures (thank goodness they were good!) and then proceeded to tell me that she saved it to her desktop wallpaper so she could see it on her computer all day long. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that she had printed it out as well. Yes they are low res, but some folks dont care. Then were talking about a crappy print with my initials on it being shown to others. Maybe the pictures on this site should be encrypted so that they cannot be copied then this wouldn't be necessary. I understand Mindy.

Thank you Amber. I am very glad someone understands. I have had several clients recently take these photographs off of this site. Not this photograph, but others before. They are printed out and framed in their offices. Other people see them and they are not pretty!! Yes, these are low resolution, but that does not stop them. I completely did this to hopefully stop the illegal print outs of my photographs. Now the client will have to order to have an "unruined" photograph!!