Get your FREE Photography Guide

A guide to "Capturing Motion" in low light situations

Is a Watermark ever okay, the dreaded Watermark has returned - Rapid Fire Critique

You know you are in for a treat when the message you get with the Rapid Fire Critique link is that “some photos have the dreaded logo”.

So the question in the long standing debate is “is a watermark ever okay”. Here’s my answer, it’s personal preference. If you feel that the watermark should be there either for branding or security purposes than put it there.

If you feel that it detracts from the image than remove it. It all comes down to what you think is right. Because the truth of the matter is there is not right or wrong answer when it comes to the watermark.

Well, maybe there is one answer, if your watermark is so over the top than maybe at that point you should shrink it or remove it. If it detracts from your image, you probably shouldn’t have it.

In this persons case I think the watermark was to much. The glasses were cool and I love the branding but the color and placement really detracted from the image.

There were a handful of nice images in the set. One of my favorites was the one with the dogs and the people. I loved the play on the color, the one dog is black the other is white.

One of my critiques on the set is that some of the images lacked interest. They were more snap shots than solid images but they are not far off. Simple tweaks to the story will allow the images to take on a life of their own and really stand out.

That’s the point of these critiques. To call it like it is in the hopes that the photographer can grow from the critique is my goal.

Previous Next