some people are intelligent enough to look past the watermark. its a pity that you arent one of them.

cheers for calling me 'repulsive' for watermarking my work.

good luck to you, with an attitude such as yours you are going to need it.



--
last night? you should have seen me, i was totally car parked!

_{psssst....want some awesome stock??}

--
Ignore previous fortune cookie...


♥ Gallery | Prints ♥

>> some people are intelligent enough to look past the watermark

You CAN'T look past the watermark, intelligent or not. *ALL* watermarked images look alike, they all have the _SAME_ central element, the _SAME_ intial visual look, and the _SAME_ main image.

They all say the same thing -- "I don't care enough about you to let you view my images -- THIEF!!"

*SOME* people are _intelligent_ enough to realize that watermarking or defacing their own images does NOTIHNG to "help protect" them, only makes them unviewable.

*SOME* people are CONSIDERATE enough of others and their time, and attention, to NOT grafitti their own images.

And, yes, it is REPULSIVE to watermark your images, and I'm angry with you for tricking me into thinking you were an artist! I "watched" you without watermarks, then without regard for me, or others, you started blighting them. *YOU* betrayed your fans, and *YOU* lost your admirers. So, the theives have won. They got you to change how you show your "art," and have allowed you to ruin it for everyone else.

I'm angry with you that you don't have enough self respect to stand on your own two feet. You let "critics" change your art into trash, and all they were doing was acting immature about your looks. You compromised yourself for others, and cowed down to others' opinions. That's not art. That's not being an artist. And it's certainly not self respect - and with out that, you don't get mine.

I'm flattered you care so much about my opinions and the loss of my "watch" to keep posting on this subject. But I will not change my mind, nor will I "watch" people who watermark their images or add copyrights/logos that block the main point in any way. I get *THAT* message loud and clear "THIEF" "SCUM" or "I don't care enough about you or my art to let you see it."

I can't dumb myself down to keep this argument going. I can't get low enough to try to explain why an artist defacing their own artwork is wrong. If you can't understand it, without explanation, then you are NOT and NEVER WILL BE an "ARTIST".

You FIGHT the censors -- not censor your own work!!! <groan>

i betray no one.

my photography is a hobby, nothing more.

--
last night? you should have seen me, i was totally car parked!

_{psssst....want some awesome stock??}

Here's hoping that someone decides to steal your artwork and post it without your permission, going so far as to claim the work as their own and/or demean your models by making lude comments about their bodies and insinuating that since they pose nude for you they must be whores.

Here's hoping that said person makes money off of your work and you're unable to stop them because you couldn't prove you actually owned the image due to lack of watermark.

Maybe then you'll understand why people use it.

--
Want to be featured or commission me? See my link for details: [link]

Are you ego centric and think you're above the rules? Click here: [link]

<sigh>

That's a piss-poor argument for defacing your own work. "Lude" comments, or "lewd" comments? Maybe you mean "lude" since you sound like you are on drugs. And, people are going to make comments about your bodies with or without watermarks.... If you put the images out there, be ready for it.

I've been doing this for over 20 years on-line. I've had more images "stolen" than most of you will ever TAKE in your lives. If I had to worry about every mis-use of my images I'd never get anything done.

So, I prosecute when I can, when I'll make money on it, but I take the images being passed around as advertising. Put your copyright on the images, if they alter the image, it's INTENTIONAL. I have the "negatives" and in digital the "RAW" images. I can prove they are mine. I just hope some _MAJOR_ publisher uses one, then I send them a bill. If I don't like the use, on-line, I get the ISP to shut off the site. But I don't kill my audience by watermarking -- it's moronic, and pointless.

A watermark PROVES NOTHING! And, anyone using an image without a release of image is liable for all sorts of other damages.

It's not for YOU to prove, it's for the person/site using the image to prove they have the right. Every day/hour/minute the image remains on-line after notification is compensable damages. If you want to protect your images, REGISTER them with the copyright office.

I'll *NEVER* understand why people use watermarks. I understand why Getty does. But, they are in it only for the money, and don't mis-represent themselves as "artists" or as a gallery.

>> Want to be featured or commission me? See my link for details

Who would EVER commission a person who graffitis their own images!


But like I said, you must really value my opinion, since you keep this up.

Scott
aka Bodyartist

You betrayed your viewers and yourself. You betrayed me, as a patron. I
watched you, then you defaced your own works... wasting my time.

But like I said, you must really value my opinion, since you keep this up.

Scott
aka Bodyartist

You know....

...like I said, you must really value my opinion, since you keep this up.

Scott
aka Bodyartist

Wow, aren't you pretentious. You think I'd give you enough credit to read all that drivle o you praising yourself and condemning anyone who doesn't fit your standards? Get real.

tl;dr.

--
Want to be featured or commission me? See my link for details: [link]

Are you ego centric and think you're above the rules? Click here: [link]