Watermarks May Discourage Visitors From Purchasing Your Artwork.
Hi everyone, I am new to the website and I have a question... I see this check box in the options that says...
\"Enable Watermark: Note: Watermarks may discourage visitors from purchasing your artwork.
I assume this means that when a person is viewing the image online, the Fine Art America watermark will be integrated into image but the printed image will be have this watermark.
Is that a safe assumption?
Side note: My first few uploads included my personal watermark, however, I am in the process of finding the original RAW files so that I can edit them again and not add the watermark.
the watermark provides the illusion that your image is safe and won't be stolen. but it stolen and can be removed. at the same time a buyer will either wonder does it print on the final image. and or that's ugly and will refuse to look at the rest. others have it though and do sell.
i personally think they are ugly, and will never help you protect the image, more than that, if they do find it, they will never find you because your name isn't on it. and you can't have your own on it, because they won't print it. so i think the best advice is - don't add a watermark on this site.
...or maybe they won't like your avatar
...or your price
...or where you live
If people really want your stuff, they'll figure out how to buy it.
Take off the watermark if you think that will help you sell but just don't whine when the work is stolen or orphaned all over the net.
I just put "Note: The watermark in the lower right does not appear in the final print." I sell plenty. Do I miss out on 10% of sales? Maybe, but I also license my work through stock agencies that use watermarks, wouldn't be right if I just left the keys in the car.
Yup, this goes way back for me way before POD or FAA was even a thing.
Back to when eBay used to put that annoying little camera watermark on all pics. I used to get a dozen messages a month asking if that camera was on the image if they bought the print. This was even with me saying in every description in every listing that it did!
I was so happy when they stopped doing it.
None of my publishers are using watermarks anymore, I don't think. I can't remember when the last time I saw one on any of their webpages anyway.
Actually stock agencies found that the less obtrusive the watermark the more sales are made. Many members would prefer no watermark there either, but in that case the agency would lose sales on small images. But once the images are licensed and used it is not hard to find them and download the unwatermarked images. It would be foolish to allow my licensees to use the images with no watermark but deny myself the same. I feel the desire to purchase is created at the instant of first sight and a watermark reduces that impact. Educating the consumer has no bearing on those lost sales.
It's not like you left the keys in the car because it is a low resolution that you know will be used by some without the watermark. The hi res image is safely stored away.
Stock agencies, if I am not mistaken, cater mostly to commercial buyers that would know the watermark is not going to be on the image in the file they receive. IMHO, it is not a good example considering we are mostly dealing with the public.
But the real tell is the fact that ever the artists themselves are asking. Think about that.
The way I understand it is the whole image the buyer sees here is a small file specifically for online use - and it will not print, or edit effectively because of that size (which is I believe the most effective way of stopping image theft). The option is there to see a small full resolution part of the image - which does not show the whole image which allows prospective customers to see exactly what they are buying - but only a small part of it. Watermarking the online use file is superfluous in my opinion. Trust that its size prevents most uses of it - it can be put on another website but that is about it.
Nope, I can take any kind of image with any kind of watermark, lift even the thumbnail, remove the watermark and have it up for sale on FAA or any other site in about one hour, in any size you want including the 24x36 or larger sizes.
I have demonstrated that a dozen times here.
The thing is, the pros that want your image because they can make money off it are not discouraged by watermarks.
The guy that uses it for his screen saver, web page or church bulletin is not costing you any money. He is not out there looking to buy anything. He is probably of the opinion, ignorant as it is, that if it is on the net it is free to use. I am not saying it is right, I am saying it is what it is and we can't prevent the real damage from being done with watermarks.
I think watermarks here prevent lazy thieves from taking your work and makes it easier for you to spot it if they do. If someone really wants to download it and clean off the watermark they will but it will take more effort.
i have all over my page - photograph, and can even say - this is a photograph - everyone thinks its a painting. so no one reads the text, they go by impulse. so they may think it prints and doesn't look further to see it doesn't.
Yeah, I even get that when selling in person in local galleries.
I have people walk up and ask me how much this painting is selling for and I tell them it is a photograph, not a painting. This happens even on the photos that have not been digitally enhanced.
I may spend half an hour or more talking to some people and even after I tell them all of my work are photos including the digitally enhanced ones that do look like paintings, they still call them paintings.
I just don't think the average buyer really cares what it is. I don't think they are all that interested in the nitty-gritty, nuts, and bolts to anywhere near degree a lot of artists think they are.
Love your comment Edward Fielding " wouldn't be right if I just left the keys in the car."
I'm with the Watermark crew it at least sends out the message that the image isn't a freebie.
And yes if people love it they'll read the small print etc - I try to state wherever possible that the Watermarks on the internet image only - sooner or later they catch on.
I opted not to use watermarks. I agree that it probably confuses a percentage of buyers, especially since if they are browsing the site in general some images have watermarks and some don't. And for those that want to steal your low res image in a lot of cases the watermark can be cloned out in under 10 seconds.
Again. You have less than a second to make an impact with your image. A watermark gets in the way of that. It doesn't matter if they know the watermarks are not on the print or not if they just kept scrolling.
The ones that would steal a low res download were not customers and nothing lost. The ones that you didn't wow in that first second are would be customers that bought something else.
Please login before posting a reply to this message. If you do not have an account on Fine Art America, click here to create one!