[Wiki Loves Monuments] Photos with watermarks

[Lodewijk]

I agree with Vincenç. The easy explanation is: Sure, you're allowed to
submit photos with a watermark. However, because of the free license, we're
allowed to remove them. Also, it is very unlikely a watermarked image will
win the competition. So if you just want an easy way to donate your
pictures and removing watermarks is too much trouble: the pictures are
welcome. If you want to win something... it is probably better to remove
them.

Best,
Lodewijk

2012/9/7 Vicenç Riullop <vriullop at hotmail.com>

>  I don't like watermarks either, but following the KISS principle I would
> say that any image accepted on Commons is acceptable on WLM although
> watermarks are discouraged and the jury probably will disqualify them.
>
> Vicenç
>
> ------------------------------
> From: samat78 at gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 10:08:17 +0200
> To: wikilovesmonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Photos with watermarks
>
>
> The Hungarian national contest prohibited watermarks for images last year
> (and personally I don't like pictures with watermark).
> In Wikimedia Commons:
> *
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Watermarks#Reasons_not_to_upload_watermarked_images
> *
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Image_guidelines#Image_page_requirements
>
> Samat
>
>  On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Nicu Buculei <nicubunu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 09/07/2012 12:35 AM, Андрій Бондаренко wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Recently one of our participant asked me - could I upload photos with
> watermarks? He argues that he loose original versions (without
> watermarks) and  their removing demands to much time. What should I
> answer him? Are photos with watermarks (as theese
> <http://toolserver.org/~**magnus/catscan_rewrite.php?**
> language=commons&project=**wikimedia&categories=Images_**
> with_watermarks&negcats=**Images+from+Wiki+Loves+**
> Monuments+2012&ns[6]=1&ext_**image_data=1&doit=1<http://toolserver.org/%7Emagnus/catscan_rewrite.php?language=commons&project=wikimedia&categories=Images_with_watermarks&negcats=Images+from+Wiki+Loves+Monuments+2012&ns%5b6%5d=1&ext_image_data=1&doit=1>
> >)
> allowed?
>
>
> I had a look at a few random images there and I can identify a few cases:
> - real watermarks (didn't find any in the examples) are when a big
> watermark covers a large and important part of the image, making it
> unusable (think at the preview images from stock photography sites). those
> CAN'T be allowed;
> - signatures, small watermarks in an unobtrusive part of the image (most
> of the time in a corner). I allow those but discourage them by explaining
> the uploaders that grace to our free license, anyone is allowed to remove
> them, so is useless;
> - some photos have the date watermarked in a corner, this probably
> happened most of the time in-camera and are unintentional. I feel them
> annoying but harmless;
> - i saw a few cases the name of an educational institution there. For
> those I would ask the uploader if the image is really free (it may be an
> internal policy to watermark everything at it may forbid derivatives).
>
> So in conclusion I do not like watermarks, would alow some, would forbid
> some, would question further some. Case by case.
>
>
> _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments
> mailing list WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikilovesmonuments/attachments/20120907/4c10803f/attachment.html>