Watermark - Where to put it?

My girlfriend has passed her degree in photography and she is looking at doing photo-shoots, weddings, events etc.

Anyway, she has created a nice watermark for her photos and she has been taught at University to put the watermark bang in the middle. Now this may be true but i think it makes the photo look 10x worse and distracts you from the actual point of the image, but i understand it is abit harder for someone to take your photo and edit the watermark out rather than having it in the corner where it can be cropped out.

What are your takes on this?

Depends if you are showing as a proof and the client is to pick and order prints or images, I put it smack in the middle (sometimes in the corner with PROOF in the middle).

If its going on FB or here for show (aka could get downloaded but o well) then in one of the corners. At that point its just there so if someone shares the image its liked back to me.

I hate watermarks, but I do it for any web image. Most images include it in the bottom corner at about 30% opacity or whatever looks the least distracting, but still readable. I try to avoid it for my portfolio galleries though because it looks bad.

If it's smack-dab in the middle then it's a watermark.

If it's on the edge, then it's just a copyright statement so the copy-n-crop perpetrators know who they're stealing from.

It's a necessary evil. Less people will steal them that way.

I just keep the image small, 700 to 800 pixels on the long side, and put my watermark near the bottom. It's large enough that cropping it away would ruin the image. Plus, there's an additional $30,000 per instance penalty that can be charged for deliberate removal of copyright protections, such as a watermark (applicable only if the images are registered in a timely manner). I think keeping the proofing image small is a better prevention than the watermark anyway.

amfoto1 wrote in post #15473791
Plus, there's an additional $30,000 per instance penalty that can be charged for deliberate removal of copyright protections, such as a watermark (applicable only if the images are registered in a timely manner). I think keeping the proofing image small is a better prevention than the watermark anyway.

That only applies in the USA. The OP profile indicates he is from the UK where there is no formal copyright registration and no statutory damages for infringement of registered copyright.

There are two different concepts here: Watermarking and branding.
Watermarking is putting a big, obtrusive mark on the print that is intended to be difficult to remove and to prevent full enjoyment of the image.

In the hardcopy days, that was the big "PROOF" stamp across the front of the image. You do that when you're presenting an image for review and you don't want to deliver or sell that particular image to the client. You only want a selection and approval for a final product delivery.

Branding is identifying yourself or your studio as the creator of the image, but in a way that clearly visible, yet unobtrusive enough to allow full enjoyment of the image. This is like an artist signing his painting in the lower right corner, and it's done on an image you are presenting as the final product to the client.

I brand all of the consumer images I delive, both digital and hardcopy, with a stylized signature in the lower right corner, but you never want to brand commercial images (including TFP images for models and such).

So figure out which/when/how you want to do your branding and watermarking, but remember that they are two different concepts.

RDKirk wrote in post #15475400
There are two different concepts here: Watermarking and branding.
Watermarking is putting a big, obtrusive mark on the print that is intended to be difficult to remove and to prevent full enjoyment of the image.

In the hardcopy days, that was the big "PROOF" stamp across the front of the image. You do that when you're presenting an image for review and you don't want to deliver or sell that particular image to the client. You only want a selection and approval for a final product delivery.

Branding is identifying yourself or your studio as the creator of the image, but in a way that clearly visible, yet unobtrusive enough to allow full enjoyment of the image. This is like an artist signing his painting in the lower right corner, and it's done on an image you are presenting as the final product to the client.

I brand all of the consumer images I delive, both digital and hardcopy, with a stylized signature in the lower right corner, but you never want to brand commercial images (including TFP images for models and such).

So figure out which/when/how you want to do your branding and watermarking, but remember that they are two different concepts.

I love this answer! Kinda thing i was looking for! Thankyou!