Signing Photos

[Dave Douglass]

I find signatures/logos on photos to be pretty visually distracting. Please excuse my ignorance, but could someone enlighten me on their perceived necessity?

 

[Larry S.]

Perhaps more to discourage image theft than anything. Artist generally sign oils, watercolors, sketches etc…. I have a signed Wyeth… even though it‘s a little scribbled image on a scrap of paper it means nothing without his signature.

 

[ajrmd]

There are a lot of alternatives if you are looking to "personalize" your work. An artist can always sign in visible or non-visible margins, on the back of the piece, directly on the work, etc. It's largely up to the individual to determine what they prefer.

 

[TurtleCat]

It was mostly encouraged to theoretically discourage image theft but it was never very effective. Same as all those things places do that prevent you from easily saving an image to disk. The simple truth is that if it can be displayed it can be saved. I gave up some years ago worrying about it and stopped all signatures and things. I’ve seen articles of places using sample photos and photos with random text or other watermarks used as billboards.

 

[Archibald]

In some online places, especially FB but sometimes in forums too, people post stuff that isn't their own. Some of those places ask you to put your logo on your own photos to indicate that you took them.

After some years, you might not even know your own photos. So put a discrete logo on them so you and others will know.

Big garish logos are a distraction for sure. But you can decide. It can be small and off in a corner and semi-transparent.

 

[Darrellhar]

I'm assuming you are referring to watermarking images posted to social media? I personally add them but not because I think it will prevent them from being stolen. As most of know they are easy to remove. I started doing it when a friend of mine shared one of my images on his FB page. When I commented that it was a great shot and where did he get it, he didn't remember. In his instance he wasn't trying to steal my image, just share it. If my watermark had been on it, it could have caused people he shared it with to go search out my page. At least that is the idea in theory. Not sure if that ever works. Most people can simply look past it as long as it isn't right in the middle of the image. The only people I've ever heard complain about watermarking images were other photographers. Most people could care less and are on to the next image in their feed.

 

[bleirer]

To me the signatures pasted into the pixels are a waste, maybe a nod to vanity. They are easy to defeat and Don't offer any protection from theft.

That said I sign and number the prints I sell with an actual pen, which to me indicates that I approved the quality and authenticity of the actual print the customer is getting, as opposed to a print on demand order where the artist never knows what the customer is getting.

 

[Woodyg3]

To me the signatures pasted into the pixels are a waste, maybe a nod to vanity. They are easy to defeat and Don't offer any protection from theft.

How is it a nod to vanity? Most all artists sign their work in one form or another.

On the other hand, if the watermark is too large or involves some sort of logo, I do think it is quite a distraction.

I agree that there is no real protection from theft.

 

[RecalcitrantRon]

How is it a nod to vanity? Most all artists sign their work in one form or another.

On the other hand, if the watermark is too large or involves some sort of logo, I do think it is quite a distraction.

I agree that there is no real protection from theft.

Yes. But isn't the real question why do they sign them? Just because most artists do so doesn't mean it's not a vanity thing (I'm not saying it is or is not).

 

[John Navitsky]

if you post to the internet, or if you allow your customers to post to the internet, your photo will become uncredited in short order without it.

 

[Archibald]

if you post to the internet, or if you allow your customers to post to the internet, your photo will become uncredited in short order without it.

Yes, exactly.

 

[MrFotoFool]

You did not specify if you mean physically signing a printed photo, or if you mean digitally adding a signature or logo in an online photo. Since you include the term logo, I assume you mean the latter (online images). As others said, it is a potential deterrent to people using your image without permission. Yes, we all know that anyone who knows how to use photo editing software can remove your logo, but at least that forces them to intentionally break the law and gives you more recourse if you can show the source they grabbed it from has your name on it. I put the copyright symbol plus my name on almost every photo I post online.

 

[Viathelens]

An "age old" question in the infancy of digital images...(an oxymoron.)
Signing our digital images to protect from theft is useless, as most of us know.

For centuries artists have signed their art, so, photographers who feel they are creating artwork sign their work...me included. I want everyone to know I did that shot so I sign all my work, digital and print. If I'm putting a very small digital image on my website I do not sign it as it is on a website managed by me.

A painting for known artists, without a signature, is worth less than one with a signature, unless someone can provide authenticity that the artist has painted that painting, something I've done in the past for the artwork of my late husband, an artist who well-known and admired in certain art circles and his work is still in two art galleries today. It's not about vanity, it's about money.

Her's what Google says about vanity,
Signs of Vanity

• Coveting money, fame, applause, materialism, or even people (Commandment)
• Excessive or compulsive focus upon self.
• Comparison of self to others that you are not in relationship with.
• Defensiveness in criticism.
• Over-emphasis with external worth and under-emphasis of internal worth.

The things above are very different than proudly letting people know you've worked hard to master the craft and present it, spending a lot of time, money and committment, and you want to shout out about that, and doing that is not vanity.

It's a personal choice, if you don't want people to know you did the piece don't sign it, it's that simple. If you do want to let people know you did the work and you are proud of your work, then sign it how you want, somewhere, anywhere, whatever works for you.

I'm signing away...

 

[Doug Herr]

If physical prints, people who buy my prints want them signed.

If online, my web address lets people know how to contact me. I also include the name of the creature, i.e.,:

Fuzzy Creature (Creaturus fuzzinica) © Douglas Herr
douglasherr.myportfolio.com

I never post high-resolution photos because I expect them to be stolen.