Digital watermarking.

Difficult one this.
There are digital watermarks but the whole point of them is to embed the watermark but leave the image unaffected to the eye.
It's only when it's analysed does the watermark pop out.

Just about the only thing you can do, and what I do, is to send the client a lower resolution copy of the image which has also been cropped slightly.
You retain the original for copyright purposes.
Have to agree with the client about usage rights etc...
When they decide what they want you then send the full res copy to the printers for final mastering and reproduction (or do it youself etc...).

Basically other than that you're stuffed.
There's nothing to stop people just printing a screenshot out and doing what they like with it.
Except the lawyers of course.
And that's what agreements are for.

There must be some way -- I see this all the time when I'm searching for images online. A sample (not sure if this will work... if not, go to www.corbis.com, search for most anything, and click on the thumbnail for a larger pic with a "CORBIS" digital watermark):

I think there does have to be a way but it might be really difficult.

I've dealt with two big photo labs that both have offered protected previews that clients can sign into so that clients can see the photos. At one lab when you clicked on the thumbnail it brought up a 4x6 with scribbles across it. That was pretty dorky because it really ruined the image and you couldn't really tell what it looked like. The other lab had a pretty good deal that when you right clicked on the image (like you would to try to copy it) it brought up a message notifying them that unauthorized use was prohibited by federal copyright law. Somehow the buttons just didn't work. You could not get the image off. If you did it as a screen shot it was a horrid resolution and a bunch of other crap in the background.

I'll will still be using lab number two for my printing but I don't want people to order from their site -- I want them to order through me only.

I think I could be stuffed if trying to just go through email though.....

I suppose I could print on spec and then try to sell the finished work but that just seems kind of funky.

Did you check out the Corbis site?

It seems to me like you could:

1. Photoshop a watermark logo of your studio or something onto a copy of the image. (I don't have Photoshop anymore but I seem to remember this isn't too difficult, just one of the options for adding text.) I know that PowerPoint has this ability, too, I used it when we were doing the postcards. It makes text that is just a few shades lighter than the photo. (Or however many shades you want.) Kind of like the borders you do sometimes, but the opposite (lighter instead of darker, but following the colors of the image, not all the text is the same color, like placing the words cut out of vellum on the image.)

2.) Upload THAT one to whatever display site you want, or email, or whatever.

3.) Once approved/ paid for/ whatever, send them a print of the original, without text or logo.

The link you posted doesn't work for me, soz, but I will find it and look a bit.

I know that Photoshop has a "Digimarc" function but I've never been able to really figure it out.

I know that Digimarc also has a thing called a "spider" that will report back to you about where the photo is used.

I really need to investigate that a bit.

(That was darker rather than lighter, not sure if you can go lighter in PowerPoint, didn't see it if so. Photoshop must have something like this, though, that'd be super-easy to do.)

The link had a comma at the end of it, sorry.

www.corbis.com

Search for anything ("dogs", for example), then click on the thumbnail to see their watermark.

Yeah! That is the kind of thing I'm talking about!

What I'd like for it to do is to not show up on the computer view but to show up if they tried to copy it or to print it.

(I'm sure there's a high-tech way to do this and that the Digimarc may well be it -- just some low-tech thoughts.)

Oh, not show up on a computer view at all? I see.

I'm definitely in the dark as to whether that's possible.

I think the hand-watermarked ones could still be used for those purposes, though -- people could still figure out whether they like the photos or not.

Hope someone can ID a cool little program for you that'll do just what you want, though.

There are a couple of things you can do that would be fairly simple.

One is put a small piece of text in the file on the print that says. "This photo copyrighted by ....." Unless they have cropping ability on their computer most reputable places won't make prints for them. You have the original file so have a clean copy to make prints. It is pretty easy to do it in Photoshop. Just make a second layer at about 50% transparancy with the text in it. You can make the text larger, cover the photo, and reduce the transparancy to make it possible to view the photo but not worth printing.

The other option since they are viewing it on screen is to send them a reduced version of the photo. Most of the major online stock photo suppliers do this. There is really no reason to send a 640x480 photo in most cases. Is the detail that important? Try sending a 320x240 photo. Still quite viewable but if they make prints they won't be as nice.

I found an example of a lightly watermarked photo here
http://www.moosegallery.com/gallery/grizzlybears1532.html

If you look closely you will see text saying it is copyrighted but it doesn't interfer with the photo.

Hi parados.

Something like that would be good.... maybe. I copied that photo over into Photoshop and increased it to 300 dpi and I think I could make a really decent 5x7 print of it. Also, where the copyright is could easily be blurred or smudged without affecting the overall image.

My lab wouldn't print it as is but I think I could easily hide that copyright and they would never know.

I guess I could always resort to the old film ways and print proofs but that seems so redundant and some of the images I do are fairly complicated for viewing in a small format.

Protecting copyright is going to be the single most complicated thing I will have to deal with.

What a pisser.

The little bit of searching I did basically said, "If they can see it on screen they can copy it."

The suggestion was to make it difficult. Sure someone can steal your photo, blur out the text, but then it means they have to spend time doing it. Most people won't do it. The same thing with low res photos. They can try to up the image. But in both cases the result won't be quite as good as paying for the real thing.

There are sites that allow you to post photos and they try to prevent copying by preventing people from right clicking and copying the photo. It works, sort of, but again if they can see it, they can take a screen shot and have a low res image.

I may be way out to lunch, but isn't this what Adobe Acrobat does? I've found a few federal forms that I can't print because of this.

That's not possible with plain image files. You'd need something like a custom application that displayed the image from an encrypted format and tried to make printing etc more difficult. And even then if it can be displayed on a monitor the output is available to capture. Plus, getting people to install/run the type of code you'd need to do this may be very inconvenient to them.

However, a lot of people have rights management issues so there may be something out there to do what you want but I recommend a more traditional approach.

The graphic designers I have worked with usually leave a subtle watermark in their samples or provide it in a different format than the client would ultimately need.

For example, if I needed a logo I would require the source image in vector format to resize and use it without it looking butt-ugly.

A logo designer would provide me with a bitmapped version in a jpg or pdf for me to look at and give me the source when the revisions are complete.

So you could do something like put a subtle watermark on a corner of the image and give the images to people in a pdf. This can have the additional benefit of improving presentation as well as some DRM that Adobe includes (like roger mentions).

Whether it's a logo, creative, photograph or anything else I've worked on, I like when the graphic designers group the images they are presenting me onto one pdf and put titles and comments with them. I usually have to show others and get their buy-in and it's a lot easier this way.

I've never run into a situation in which I was worried about DRM with the samples this way, and I've worked on both sides of this exchange (selling graphic media to a client as well as purchasing it from a graphic artist).




Music and movie studios feel the same way with computers... DRM has always been tough in digital mediums.

Well hi there, Craven! Long time, no see.

You too, roger!

Using a lesser used format makes a lot of sense. Maybe embedded with something warning that the image is for proofing purposes only that would show up if someone tried to enlarge the image.

What is DRM?

What I really want to avoid is people making crappy computer prints and showing them around as "pictures" that I've taken.

This is what I'm saying you may have to reconcile yourself to living without.

Having a watermark that is conditional (i.e. displays only in certain situations) may not be viable for your needs. I personally don't think it's something you should be going for, as the way to get there would introduce bigger inconveniences for you and expecially the viewers (e.g. "Please download and install this program to see this image").



Digital Rights Management. It's a significant technical challenge.

So far, it has done more to alienate clients from the rights holder than protect rights. One such example was Sony's illegal DRM rootkit that ended up costing them millions in a recall.

http://www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-6376177-1.html



Trying to control what people do on computers is a tough thing to pull off cleanly (without pissing them off).

My recommendation is still that you give them pdfs of the image and watermark it. You can even put a "low resolution" watermark on it.

I don't recommend that you try what you are describing, both because of the inherent difficulty as well as the associated side effects (ill-will).

You'll have to forgive me. I am an absolute and total computer moron. I know rudimentary Photoshop and basic Word.

What I meant by a lesser used format was a pdf file or something like that. Most labs require jpeg uploads for printing.

I've been goofing around with watermarking, resolution, image size, blahblahblah, trying to hit on a combination that would work. I'm emailing them to myself to see if I can nab them, put them back into Photoshop and amp them up for a decent print.

I'm going to post one of my tests here too to see if I can swipe it. I'd also like to know if you all think the watermark is too distracting. Would it prevent you from ordering the photo (provided it was a photo of someone you wanted a photo of)?



(5x6.25 at 72dpi)