# What do you think of my watermark?



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Originally, it was just going to be DGM Photography, but, aha, that name was taken on Facebook so I put my favorite number in there! DGM 7Photography. I like the 7. So far, its meaning is a spiritual thing. I am only here on this planet, and able to do photography, thanks to my Creator


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 17, 2012)

I saw it on some photos earlier! Personally I think it is way too large, and very distracting.  If you half the size, and half the opacity.. it might be doable!

EDIT.. it looks like you did that already, compared to the version I saw today. The Dark Cloud version isn't too bad.. although I still think using a watermark HERE is silly. Using it elsewhere.. maybe... but not to many people here are going to try and steal photos.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> I saw it on some photos earlier! Personally I think it is way too large, and very distracting.  If you half the size, and half the opacity.. it might be doable!
> 
> EDIT.. it looks like you did that already, compared to the version I saw today. The Dark Cloud version isn't too bad.. although I still think using a watermark HERE is silly. Using it elsewhere.. maybe... but not to many people here are going to try and steal photos.



Haha, yup!  I realized my watermark was too large and distracting so I've fixed it. This is just the base image I use, then I add it in photoshop and shrink and halve the opacity. I do realize that using a watermark here is probably silly, as compared to most others here, my photography is not that great, but I post these images other places too and it's just easier to add it and be done with it.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > I saw it on some photos earlier! Personally I think it is way too large, and very distracting.  If you half the size, and half the opacity.. it might be doable!
> ...



You may catch hell for it.. be warned!


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 17, 2012)

Personally, I can't see it being a 7, and the G looks like a C, O or U to me.

And if I were to read it without explanation, I would see Something-or-Other-Who-Knows-WhatDUM Photography.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

I don't want to turn this into a religious debate, but what religion are you? Are you Christian based? 

As for the logo as it sits, although its definitely unique, it's near impossible to read, and the lines aren't fluid with each other. I think it needs a complete make over.


----------



## KmH (Aug 17, 2012)

+1 more - It's not sufficiently legible.

I highly recommend applying the K.I.S.S. principle.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 17, 2012)

I really thought it was DCM


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Hahaha, thanks guys, now I know! And yes, I am Christian. By the way, this is the Batman font xD


----------



## sm4him (Aug 17, 2012)

Peano said:


> AaronLLockhart said:
> 
> 
> > As for the logo as it sits, although its definitely unique, it's near impossible to read, and the lines aren't fluid with each other. I think it needs a complete make over.
> ...





KmH said:


> +1 more - It's not sufficiently legible.
> 
> I highly recommend applying the K.I.S.S. principle.



^+Whatever number we're up to now. I thought it said "TDCM" Photocraphy.


----------



## KmH (Aug 17, 2012)

Stick with the more main stream fonts.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Mainstream= Nonunique. Sorry, I'm a hipster.


----------



## MTVision (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:
			
		

> Mainstream= Nonunique. Sorry, I'm a hipster.



So unique that people can't read it?? There are a million fonts out there that are more legible or you could make your own. The whole point of a watermark/logo like that is to let people know whose work it is. And yes, a watermark is suppose to be for protection but it's really not that effective.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

MTVision said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I didn't say that!  Ha, don't worry, I'm working on an improvement now. I've taken your guys' opinion into consideration.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

OKAY GUYS, here is the new logo:



I had to add the grey background so you could see it, but normally that won't be there of course.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

I'm kind of iffy about the border. It's almost like a 'hey look at my signature, look at it right here" approach, but do you want the viewer to be focused on your photo or the ornate logo, which may or may not look like it was created with more thought than the photo.

If you have a very elaborate logo, I think that your  photos had better damn well be just as nice or it'll just seem counterintuitive. Lol


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I'm kind of iffy about the border. It's almost like a 'hey look at my signature, look at it right here" approach, but do you want the viewer to be focused on your photo or the ornate logo, which may or may not look like it was created with more thought than the photo.
> 
> If you have a very elaborate logo, I think that your  photos had better damn well be just as nice or it'll just seem counterintuitive. Lol



Ha, don't worry, I'll try to make it as small and transparent as possible. Either that or remove the border.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 17, 2012)

I still read it as 7DGM Photography.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:


> Mainstream= Nonunique. Sorry, I'm a hipster.



Man, I think you're limiting yourself because you want to fit into a certain social genre.

Here is what you have to realize, even your new logo is not marketable, at all. People can go get their photos taken by a thousand other people other than you in the same city as you are located in. Without a positive way to represent yourself, you have no hope in a highly competitive economy.

You think you are setting yourself apart from everyone else, which you are... even setting yourself away from the possibility of ever getting clients. Change the logo to something very sleek, simple, and fluid. You would be better off using Helvetica than the route that you have chosen.

BTW, I know what I'm saying is very blunt and harsh, but please understand I am not attacking you. What I'm saying needs to be said. You will never be successful attempting to market yourself with a WM/Logo that looks like that.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

AaronLLockhart said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Mainstream= Nonunique. Sorry, I'm a hipster.
> ...



Thank you!  I'm actually studying business and marketing is one of my specialties, but I suppose when it comes to photography, it's a different ball game. I will now try _sleek. _Stay tuned! Oh, and I don't actually consider myself a hipster haa, that was just a joke.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 17, 2012)

Who cares, really. This isn't for a business. It's for fun.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:
			
		

> Who cares, really. This isn't for a business. It's for fun.



Well obviously the OP cares. Heh...


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Who cares, really. This isn't for a business. It's for fun.



? I was going off of the information I gathered from his Facebook page, offering a professional service.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 17, 2012)

I didn't get that at all from The Facebook.


----------



## laynea24 (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:
			
		

> I am only here on this planet, and able to do photography, thanks to my Creator



I am so glad to here that! All I want is for my photography to glorify God. I would like to hear more about what the 7 stands for.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> I didn't get that at all from The Facebook.







Hmmm, well I must have gotten confused on the part where I read "Professional Services"


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Hahaha, you guys are great. Jeweler, you're seeming kinda bitter! bahaha!


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

laynea24 said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The 7 is described in more detail on my Facebook page, but I'll post it here for you!

"The "7" was originally included just because "DGMPhotography" was taken,  but now that I think about it, it's actually a catchy name and can  really mean something. I am a man of God, and to me, 7 is a special  number, the day that our creator and provider, rested after creating the  world and all the great things in it that us photographer's get to  capture in our little cameras!"


----------



## Bitter Jeweler (Aug 17, 2012)

And I must of been confused by the part that said he created a Facebook page cuz nobody was lookin' at his tumblr.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> And I must of been confused by the part that said he created a Facebook page cuz nobody was lookin' at his tumblr.



I thought both pages were interesting! Didn't you?


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> And I must of been confused by the part that said he created a Facebook page cuz nobody was lookin' at his tumblr.



Does anyone look at tumblr?


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Bitter Jeweler said:


> And I must of been confused by the part that said he created a Facebook page cuz nobody was lookin' at his tumblr.



What about Tumblr?


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

So how does the title go? 7DGMPhotography?


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

AaronLLockhart said:
			
		

> Does anyone look at tumblr?



Only for naked Anime women and kittens.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Well, SOME people look at Tumblr. It's DGM 7Photography. 
Here's a new one:


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:


> Well, SOME people look at Tumblr. It's DGM 7Photography.
> Here's a new one:
> 
> View attachment 17378



the best yet.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

AaronLLockhart said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > Well, SOME people look at Tumblr. It's DGM 7Photography.
> ...



YES!!


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 17, 2012)

Dude I don't want to come off wrong here, but I think watermarks and branding should be moved way down on your priority list right now. Looking at your shots you've posted to your Facebook page, I don't know how to say this without coming off rude, but they all  kind of suck. There are fundamental issues with exposure/composition/processing etc. I think it would serve you well to step away from the computer, perhaps pick up a book and start reading and studying photography, and most importantly getting out and shooting more. 

And specifically about your watermark, given that in Western culture we read left to right, your watermark intuitively reads "7DGMphotography". That's what I'd assume is the name of your business and that's what I typed into facebook based on the label.  But it's really facebook.com/*DGM7*photography, so that's a fundamental flaw with the watermark that needs to be addressed.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

Rotanimod said:
			
		

> Dude I don't want to come off wrong here, but I think watermarks and branding should be moved way down on your priority list right now. Looking at your shots you've posted to your Facebook page, I don't know how to say this without coming off rude, but they all  kind of suck. There are fundamental issues with exposure/composition/processing etc. I think it would serve you well to step away from the computer, perhaps pick up a book and start reading and studying photography, and most importantly getting out and shooting more.
> 
> And specifically about your watermark, given that in Western culture we read left to right, your watermark intuitively reads "7DGMphotography". That's what I'd assume is the name of your business and that's what I typed into facebook based on the label.  But it's really facebook.com/DGM7photography, so that's a fundamental flaw with the watermark that needs to be addressed.



I hope you're wearing your bulletproof underwear.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> Dude I don't want to come off wrong here, but I think watermarks and branding should be moved way down on your priority list right now. Looking at your shots you've posted to your Facebook page, I don't know how to say this without coming off rude, but they all  kind of suck. There are fundamental issues with exposure/composition/processing etc. I think it would serve you well to step away from the computer, perhaps pick up a book and start reading and studying photography, and most importantly getting out and shooting more.
> 
> And specifically about your watermark, given that in Western culture we read left to right, your watermark intuitively reads "7DGMphotography". That's what I'd assume is the name of your business and that's what I typed into facebook based on the label.  But it's really facebook.com/DGM7photography, so that's a fundamental flaw with the watermark that needs to be addressed.



If you would look at the latest version, you would see I changed that. And thanks for saying my photos suck, I appreciate it. For now, I believe they are above average. They may not be good to you bigshots, but generally, they're not bad, at least to the common eye.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> Rotanimod said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lol, bulletproof underwear huh? wth?


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 17, 2012)

Rotanimod said:
			
		

> lol, bulletproof underwear huh? wth?



Just implying that people will probably want to shoot you in the crotch for having the audacity to use the "s" word in the same sentence as "your photos..."

Shame on you. Lol


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

You crack me up, Rex.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Ok, fine. I will go to the library and get some photography books. That seems to be the general consensus here. However, this thread is about my watermark so talking about my photography is kind of off topic.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Oh, and Rot, I just 'liked' your FB page. You've got some good stuff. Maybe I'll be as good as you someday! ;P


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

Does it look better with or without the line?

View attachment 17380


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Aug 17, 2012)

DGMPhotography said:


> If you would look at the latest version, you would see I changed that. And thanks for saying my photos suck, I appreciate it. For now, I believe they are above average. They may not be good to you bigshots...



I know it sounds harsh, because it is, but sometimes that's the best way to make an impact. I do not consider myself a "big shot", neither do most people here, but you really need to know your audience. A lot of people on here range from enthusiast to full time paid pro, and photography is an art/science/craft that we analyze, produce and consume each day. 




DGMPhotography said:


> ...but generally, they're not bad, at least to the common eye.



I would argue the opposite. The "common eye" is much more visually sophisticated than you give credit for. The average person knows the difference between a professional image, and an average one. The average person is exposed to thousands of images a week through various mediums. Lots of those are professional images, so often people can intuitively tell the difference between their friends "cell phone snap" or "point and shoot vacation pics" and a professionally captured/processed image.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 17, 2012)

AaronLLockhart said:


> Does anyone look at tumblr?






DGMPhotography said:


> What about Tumblr?



What *IS* Tumblr?


----------



## DGMPhotography (Aug 17, 2012)

480sparky said:


> AaronLLockhart said:
> 
> 
> > Does anyone look at tumblr?
> ...



Blog site.


----------

