DZComposer Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Since we are now starting to host game screens and such, I have created a watermark based on the original one from SF-O.com. I did not have the original so I ripped it off from a site that ripped a screen shot off of SFO to begin with. Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krystal Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 I don't believe in watermarks. They serve a similar purpose as DRM: damage the file in some way for everyone in an effort to make it difficult for would-be pirates to copy media inappropriately. I never liked watermarks on images I got from websites, so I don't see why we have to do that. After all, the Krystal Archive uses no watermarks, and though things are copied, no-one has even attempted to use my images to compete with me. I say, no watermarks, and that we should use our good reputation (or build one) as a better method to attract attention to the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DZComposer Posted December 10, 2007 Author Share Posted December 10, 2007 The watermarks are for things that are either 1: likely to be hotlinked (which there won't be many) or 2: exclusive in nature that we want to be credited as the original source for. The whole idea with this new design is to minimize the obstruction caused by the mark. Placement will be in the least obstructing part of the image, unlike what most people do and stick it on the same part of each image. For instance, if there is a large portion of empty space in the image, that's where the mark will go. In the cnippet I showed as the original mark, you can see that it was placed in a horrible spot. I wouldn't put them there. I'd just cover a small portion of the skybox. For instance: Of course watermarking press pack screens and art is stupid. It's just a way to give credit to SFO for images that we deserve credit for. It's not for every image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infinity Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Watermarks are insanely important to protecting intellectual property like art 'n stuff. Watermarks barely damage an image if used properly like DZ said. Everything I draw and consider complete I make sure there's a watermark on it. To the general populace who doesn't know anything about where something came from its important to have a watermark, otherwise anyone could just claim ownership over anything. I'm for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbital Fox Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 I usually don't like watermarks, but if it links to SFO then I'm for it. I like the new design as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Krystal Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Of course watermarking press pack screens and art is stupid. It's just a way to give credit to SFO for images that we deserve credit for. It's not for every image. Oh, well if it's only for exclusives and placed in an unobstructive place, I guess that's alright. It's not like we have that much exclusive media right now though, except for audio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Four-eyed Vulpine Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 It sounds like a neat idea. One of the biggest uses for it would be for SF screenshots any members produce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Fox Runner Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I was thinking of making some wallpapers for exclusive content for the main site, the watermark can be used for those. Once my computer is fixed I'll give that a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts