Industry rant: Watermarking game images

A news article from Joystiq that i actually agree with 100%:

http://www.dcemu.co.uk/ps3stockwatermark.jpg

What's the deal with watermarking game-related images (spoken in my best Seinfeld impersonation)? Especially when the image in question isn't even proprietary? Case in point: When the final unveiling of the PS3 took place on May 8, 2006 during Sony's E3 press briefing, Joystiq bloggers scrambled to get the newly and publicly released media image up on the site. Two images were submitted (pictured above) to our Editor-in-Chief, and after long debates, arguments, and thrown chairs, option B was selected. I think we made the right choice.

We're obviously exaggerating here, but even those pesky watermarks placed at the bottom right of press release images by online publishers annoy any aesthetic purists. Non-proprietary image watermarks have got to go. End rant.

We at DCEmu fully agree with Joystiq and the many other sites who dislike these practices, what we are seeing now is sites watermarking images that arent legally theres to watermark, the real owner of an image is the person who takes the photo or sells it, surely not some site who wants to make them feel important.

What are your views on this issue

I am not adverse to subtle watermarking. The sites that do watermark, GameSpot as an example allow their images to be hotlinked and would be using the watermark to generate hits to their site whilst they pay the bandwidth costs of hosting the image.

Example:
http://i.i.com.com/cnet.g2/images/20..._screen050.jpg

I am slightly biased though as I work for a marketting and media agency.

Abs

I think the watermarking thing is daft. Even if you do own an image your spoiling the quality of it. Other than that, the internet ought to allow a free and fair tranfer of information, and a lot've the time it is able to succeed, with homebrew being an excellent example. so watermarking is against an ideal that I hold.

All artists that I know own the copyright of their images and game companies hold the copyright of all artwork to their games, which includes game screen shots, so if you watermark an image that you didn't create (without express permission from the owner), then you are breaking the law. If I created some orignal artwork and somebody watermarked it and put it on their site, I'd sue their asses!

loller..
i don't give a damn, i can find anything on Google Images :D

I just look beyond the watermarking, plus I think advertising for yourself too much is stupid.

Wraggster nice Seinfeld impersonation. Props

Water marks Are annoying:mad: . Look at this picture of shoes from the internet.
Even worst the shoes look suspiciously fake, but in their FAQ they said they don't sell variants or fakes.

I don't like the water marks, it takes away from the photo and who cares if thye photo is a fake. We all like to dream sometimes right?!

i agree completely. not only are watermarks annoying, they probably shouldn't be on images of something that you dont own.

As long as it doesm't cover the focus of the image its fine with me. Some water marks you can't even see without maginfying it alot.howeve the watermarks that are in Raekwik11's post would anoy me. it also depends on what its is. If i am just truing to see what a dvd player looks like when i am buying online and the water mark doesn't distort what it looks like I dont' care. if i am examining a phot for detail then i care

I'll be brief:

Marking an image with a logo at the top or bottom to let people know where the image came from = fine.

Spamming your logo across an entire image that you don't own the copyright to for any reason = not fine.

Spamming your logo across an entire image that you own the copyright to for any reason = fine.

( In my best Peter Lorre voice)

they ruin my porn.