Digital and Paper Prints for Clients

Do you have your watermark/name/logo on the clinet version of the images. This is a generic question and includes weddings, portraits, music etc.

I am slowly inclining to not put my watermark on the client version of images. I provided digital copies to my clients and they are free to print from where ever they want to. as normally they print one large size wall mount and rest is all online or digital.

The only place where I am having it is my own facebook or site which I am planning atleast for the site not to have em.

What is your opinion?

I don't watermark final images at all, and I don't know anyone who does.

Some people sign their name, but I don't. A signature isn't the same as a watermark.

Depends. Am I giving them "Facebook Ready" images or printable images? If they only pay for Facebook images, it has my watermark on them. If they pay for the full res images, they don't.

Presumably the client has paid good money for the prints and they deserve to have it watermark free. I don't do anything except put a sticker on the back on anything up to and including 11x14. Anything larger than that I hand sign in gold foil in the lower right hand corner with the month and year. It is small and unobtrusive. I know several studios that do the same though some have a stamp machine for it which is too expensive for my tastes.

There really isn't a right or a wrong answer to your question. It is a matter of personal preference and how you manage post shoot sales. Some like to give the customer a set of JPG's that they can just print their own. We encourage our customers to buy the prints from us and as such follow the procedure mentioned above. All web images have a watermark to discourage those that want to take a copy and print it. One thing I encourage people to do is to find out what others in their geographic area are doing. It is part of the competitive analysis for us.

All my images are "branded" in some way. Facebook or other web-destined images have my logo outside the image area, prints have my signature in the corner.

I don't consider either of these a "watermark," which is, properly speaking, an obtrusive mark that permits the image to be identified, but is intended to prevent the image from being enjoyed.

good, here the market is volatile and mis of every thing, i am thinking on the same lines as all the remarks, thanks guys and it kinda makes sense for facebook.