Web page help....

[krossfyter]

Re: Re: Web page help....

Originally posted by RBMaraman


Maybe these 2 artists should have someone professional design their websites. If they are this concerned, I would suggest using a professional web designer that specializes in websites for artists.

Actually they want me to do it... they dont want to spend a lot of money so im giving them a good deal. I pay off by learning and creating webistes for my portfolio etc. etc. ... and besides they are friends of mine. One whom I studied under. They are not that concerned with the image thing Im the one who suggested protecting thier images etc. etc.

 

[ibjoshua]

Re: Re: Re: Web page help....

Originally posted by krossfyter They are not that concerned with the image thing Im the one who suggested protecting thier images etc. etc.

well in that case don't stress. as others have already said if an image is on a website then if someone wants it they'll get it.

i personally find the javascript solution irritating and offensive but i guess it is a deterrant.

there is another way but I think it only works in mozilla based browsers. simply stretch an empty div over the top of you images like so:

<div id="Layer1" style="position:absolute; left:0px; top:0px; width:640px; height:480px; z-index:0;">
<img src="img/home/blueboys.gif" width="640" height="480"></div>
<div id="Layer2" style="position:absolute; left:0px; top:0px; width:640px; height:480px; z-index:1;"></div>

a right click will then not bring up a 'save image...' contextual menu. Of course it'll never stop someone scouring their cache or viewing the code to pick out the file name.

if you're actually wanting to enforce copyright then you will need to use a proper watermark embedding plugin with photoshop or purchase one of those proprietary java applets like they used to have on

terraserver

another thing you can do is cut all the images up into multiple slices so that it's too much work to piece them all together .

i_b_joshua

 

[krossfyter]

hey thanks ib josua.

so the slicing up the imaging thing can be done on photoshop right?

about the watermark.... cant anyone somewhat esxpierenced with photoshop or any other painting software get an image with a watermark and simply edit it out?

 

[Gaz]

I remember when I first start doing some web design I wanted to protect all my work. However the true is the web is designed to allow people to share content and there is nothing you can do to protect your content besides only allow access to select people.

The problem with all these measures people are suggesting, particularly disabling right click, is that it you are breaking the usability of the browser and can make viewing your site a big turn off. I always open new browsers for links and when I loose that facility it is frustrating.

Your best approach would be to add a watermark if you are that bothered is it that big a concern if people want to borrow the images? As long as they don't break copyright I think it's good to let people take your images.

I hope this helps you and if I was you I'd try to make the most of maximising what the site looks like and not to get too overly concerned with this type of protection. Realisticly very few people will steal things, all they need is to see the pic to get an idea on how to reproduce the image.

Good luck

Gaz

 

[Rags]

Originally posted by krossfyter
hey thanks ib josua.

so the slicing up the imaging thing can be done on photoshop right?

about the watermark.... cant anyone somewhat esxpierenced with photoshop or any other painting software get an image with a watermark and simply edit it out?

Depends on the image, for example the text and circle below would be hard to edit out.

 

[macktheknife]

Originally posted by krossfyter
hey thanks ib josua.

so the slicing up the imaging thing can be done on photoshop right?

about the watermark.... cant anyone somewhat esxpierenced with photoshop or any other painting software get an image with a watermark and simply edit it out?

It can't be done. As you can see from the sample picture above, it is almost impossible to remove the watermark. Yes, you can erase it, but the picture won't look the same because you're not erasing the layer but actual pixels. Essentially, once you save the photoshop file with a watermark in gif or jpeg format, it would be the same as someone taking a brush and painting over the Mona Lisa. Yes, you can try to get the paint off, but the Mona Lisa won't look the same.

 

[krossfyter]

Okay I understand what you all are saying... thanks.


Did i do it? Is this a success or not? Im just checking it out...playing around.

 

[Rags]

Almost! I had to look at both images for a minute or two and I can see 4 or 5 differences. Like I said before, it depends on the image. If it were a face or a portrait of someone, it would be very hard. Since my example is sort of sepia tone flames and basically shades of the same color, you can almost recreate the waves/spikes.

 

[macktheknife]

Originally posted by Rags
Almost! I had to look at both images for a minute or two and I can see 4 or 5 differences. Like I said before, it depends on the image. If it were a face or a portrait of someone, it would be very hard. Since my example is sort of sepia tone flames and basically shades of the same color, you can almost recreate the waves/spikes.

Yeah, it will depend on the image and how you place the watermark (I will say that a circle Rags' is pretty good since it covers a wide area). Rags' image had shades of similar color, so it was easy. However, I think this picture on the bottom will be much more difficult to change if you had a watermark embedded:

 

[Choppaface]

it would also help to have some gradient in the watermark. with a simple shape, you could try tracing the thing and then using levels, brightness/contrast, curves, etc, undo the watermark. increasing the entire pix's contrast would help eliminate any edges. but with a gradient of some sort in the watermark, it's quite a bit harder unless you try to go about reproducing it, which can be really hard if you use like a radial gradient or some complex gradient like clouds

 

[Gus]

Re: Re: Ummm..

Originally posted by Choppaface


that will still allow the user to do whatever they want with the image (in fact, it will be even easier for them to steal their pix, as they can just download the link )

BTW, don't forget the leading underscore, "_blank"

I wasn't actually referring to the users' ability to modify the image, just the new window with his picture or page. By the way, I know that the underscore is supposed to be necessary, but I have actually never used it, and it works fine in almost every browser that I have tried.

Gus

 

[Choppaface]

Re: Re: Re: Ummm..

Originally posted by Gus

and it works fine in almost every browser that I have tried.

wow that's odd.... I would think that some of the more bratty types at W3C would be all over anybody who tried to put out a browser that would do that he he

 

[ibjoshua]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ummm..

Originally posted by Choppaface


wow that's odd.... I would think that some of the more bratty types at W3C would be all over anybody who tried to put out a browser that would do that he he

this would also work:

<a href='apage.html' target='this_does_not_matter'>would work</a>


if the 'target' attribute of an anchor tag contains a name that does not match any existing window then a new window is opened. it's not the same as using javascript though as you don't have any control over the windows appearance.

i_b_joshua

 

[ibjoshua]

Originally posted by Choppaface
it would also help to have some gradient in the watermark. with a simple shape, you could try tracing the thing and then using levels, brightness/contrast, curves, etc, undo the watermark. increasing the entire pix's contrast would help eliminate any edges. but with a gradient of some sort in the watermark, it's quite a bit harder unless you try to go about reproducing it, which can be really hard if you use like a radial gradient or some complex gradient like clouds

i'd agree with most of what everyone has said but i think it should be pointed out that technically if it's visual it can be corrected. a proper digital watermark is embedded in the code and is undetectable by the human eye. any visual watermarking is in fact there simply to deter unauthorised use.

i_b_joshua