0 people like this thread
Staff pick
Total posts: 7 (Showing page 1 of 1)
Digimark
by snapshot2 
- 11/28/10 9:02 PM
In Reply to: Embedded watermark using Digmarc by taboma
I believe the spelling is Digimark.
A quick look at Digimark tells me I need to know what version of Adobe Photoshop you are using.
There are differences in the Digimark plug-in based on the Photoshop version.
Joe
I have Photoshop CS2.
From what I see, the Digimarc plug-in is called a filter, and it is not free.
If you want to put a watermark on one of your pictures you must first register with Digimarc.
There are three levels, with increasing prices:
$50 - $100 - $500
For free - you are able to look at a photo and see if it has a Digimarc watermark.
But you can not write a watermark until you register with Digimarc.
Joe
Joe, thanks for responding to my question concerning this Photoshop plug-in.
I use Adobe Photoshop V-7.
I also went to the Digimarc.com site and found out that the Basic Edition costs $49 annually. The Pro: $100 annually. Digimarc can also track who downloaded your photo from the Web and will alert you. How about that!!
The free version does not work with V-7 at all. Bummer!
I think that the Digimarc plug-in would be wonderful for all photographers in order to protect their photos from being commercially used without paying a fee to the photographer.
Using Digimarc software, does that guarantee that you photo is protected under the copy write law?
I do not think so. It only shows ownership of that photo.
Same as a registered trademark has to be filed properly also.
I have a U.S. Patent for which I filed for and paid a fee in order to receive the patent.
I think that is the same with a copy write.
I see watermarks on many photos with a ?and the photographers name.
Is it really a copy write indeed!?
Joe, your thoughts? Thanks,
-Kevin
Watermark.
by snapshot2 - 12/10/10 8:08 AM
In Reply to: Digimarc Watermark by taboma
I watched (on TV) an interview with someone who was knowledgeable about Copyright matters.
What stuck in my mind was that any photo you take is automatically protected by copyright.
However you can apply for and get an official copyright.
The difference being ... if you go to court to protect your photo and you win the court action, you can get your legal costs reimbursed if you have the official copyright.
If you don't have the official copyright, you are responsible for your legal costs even if you win the court action.
Digimarc would be a good way to prove ownership of a photo in a court case.
The most effective watermark is the type that puts visible information in the picture.
To use the photo, someone would need to use something like Photoshop to try to remove the watermark. If the watermark location and size is carefully chosen, that could prove difficult to do.
..
Any code can be broken.
by R. Proffitt - 12/2/10 1:58 PM
In Reply to: Embedded watermark using Digmarc by taboma
Now that it's busted, what next?
Read:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/30/canon_verification_cracked/
Bob
Any code can be broken.
by taboma - 12/9/10 10:47 PM
In Reply to: Any code can be broken. by R. Proffitt
Bob, thanks for your insight and the link.
I went to the site and was amazed!!!!
Thanks
-Kevin
Total posts: 7 (Showing page 1 of 1)
Unread
Read
Locked thread
Moderator
CNET Staff
Samsung Staff
Norton Authorized Support Team
AVG Staff
avast! Staff
Webroot Support Team
Acer Customer Experience Team
Windows Outreach Team
Dell Staff
Intel Staff
Question
Resolved question
General discussion
Tip
Alert or warning
Praise
RantYou are e-mailing the following post: Post Subject
You are reporting the following post: Post Subject
You are posting a reply to: Post Subject
Manage updates with the Download App