[Tas]

I came across this article: Google shows how easy it is for software to remove watermarks from photos - The Verge that I thought some around here might be interested in, particularly if you're watermarking your images for protection.

There's a short video that shows the theory behind their paper, and there are links to the actual document if you are one of those boffin types that can do math with the alphabet.

Tas

---

Last edited by Tas; 08-18-2017 at 10:08 PM.

[Adam]

I came across this article: Google shows how easy it is for software to remove watermarks from photos - The Verge that I thought some around here might be interested in, particularly if you're waermarking your images for protection.

There's a short video that shows the theory behind their paper, and there are links to the actual document if you are one of those boffin types that can do math with the alphabet.

Tas

Once a photo is out there it's hard to prevent it from being used maliciously if someone sets their mind to it. However, watermarks are still highly effective in providing attribution or at least raising questions when someone posts/uses your photo without your knowledge.

[Tas]

Once a photo is out there it's hard to prevent it from being used maliciously if someone sets their mind to it. However, watermarks are still highly effective in providing attribution or at least raising questions when someone posts/uses your photo without your knowledge.

Fair enough Adam, did you watch the video on the recommended changes?

[Adam]

Fair enough Adam, did you watch the video on the recommended changes?

No, but I got carried away reading the research paper Really interesting stuff!

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[mee]

I wonder how long it will take until the algorithm can accommodate for the warp effect in the watermark? tit for tat

[rawr]

I wonder how long it will take until the algorithm can accommodate for the warp effect in the watermark? tit for tat

Watermarks can be legally useful even if they may technically be easy to 'crack'.

If you can demonstrate that the original was watermarked, but the offending party took deliberate steps to remove the watermark [even better if removing the watermark was not technically easy to do], it may add strength to any claim for damages and/or copyright infringement.

[mee]

Watermarks can be legally useful even if they may technically be easy to 'crack'.

If you can demonstrate that the original was watermarked, but the offending party took deliberate steps to remove the watermark [even better if removing the watermark was not technically easy to do], it may add strength to any claim for damages and/or copyright infringement.

How do you plan to do that? If they can algorithmically lift the entire watermark now (as shown in the article linked in the original post), leaving absolutely no trace, you'd have no proof. Unless you filed it officially. Otherwise it becomes a sticky legal case of showing you hosted the image before they did, but even that can be thwarted. The thief could strip your watermarks, watermark your image as theirs, back date the image and the upload date earlier than yours, and host it on their own site. Or you prove you were at that setting at that day and time of the photo and they weren't. But that's annoying to have to do.

I find better options would be to keep the image size relatively small (I use 1024 or 1200 on the long edge) and watermark multiple places with different watermark designs. For instance, have the general 'obvious' watermark but then have a smaller one along the edge of the subject or a part of the scene and another in the background with less opacity. Complexity in the watermarking.

Then again if we really want to be sure, as Adam alludes to, just don't host the image online!

[rawr]

you'd have no proof.

RAW's will do the job, if push came to shove. Hard to reverse-engineer one of my DNG's ...

But yes - simple watermark with contact info + keeping the JPEG file size relatively small is the most practical way to do it. If you have batches of JPEGs to upload, customising the watermark for each image is just too hard.

[jpzk]

What if you "embed" a tiny mark somewhere in the picture, but only "visible" to you: i.e.: you know where it is but because it is so small, nobody really thinks there is a "watermark" ?

[Digitalis]

Once a photo is out there it's hard to prevent it from being used maliciously if someone sets their mind to it.

...or for their own monetary gain.

[jbinpg]

@jpzk - Google for "steganography". It is the only viable way to put your stamp on an image.

[chebum]

Google also holds a patent for video watermark removal: WO2017016294A1 - Method and apparatus for removing watermark from video - Google Patents
They benefit from copyright theft and thus invest into making watermarks useless.

[BigMackCam]

Google also holds a patent for video watermark removal: WO2017016294A1 - Method and apparatus for removing watermark from video - Google Patents
They benefit from copyright theft and thus invest into making watermarks useless.

But presumably this patent also gives Google a stronger case against those that produce watermark removal software using the same methodology... in which case, it has positive applications, though only if Google chooses to use it that way...

[mattb123]

I watermark my images in case someone sees it and wants to know whose it was.
Also as mentioned earlier keeping file sizes on the small side should help avoid unauthorized use as well.

[jpzk]

@jpzk - Google for "steganography". It is the only viable way to put your stamp on an image.

Late replying ...

What's that steganography?
(too lazy to look it up)