This is definitely one thing which iStock handled much better than SS. And that is a strange thing to say... I hope they will do something about it ASAP.

For all you guys complaining the watermark is too small. STOP YOUR COMPLAINING. it might be problematic for vectors or illustrations with lots of solid shape areas but for photos, it is very effective watermark as you see the image and also doesnt deter from it.

I have spent 30 mins cleaning one photo up with lots of solid areas so its easier to cleanup but it is still a lot of time consuming work to clean. I am an expert at photoshop and illustrator and know what I am doing and to get a photo to a point where the watermark isnt detectable requires a lot of work. It isn't worth the effort to erase the watermark so it is doing a good job IMO.

Before you complain, try cleaning up one yourself and you will quickly realise it is good enough.

For all you guys complaining the watermark is too small. STOP YOUR COMPLAINING. it might be problematic for vectors or illustrations with lots of solid shape areas but for photos, it is very effective watermark as you see the image and also doesnt deter from it.

I have spent 30 mins cleaning one photo up with lots of solid areas so its easier to cleanup but it is still a lot of time consuming work to clean. I am an expert at photoshop and illustrator and know what I am doing and to get a photo to a point where the watermark isnt detectable requires a lot of work. It isn't worth the effort to erase the watermark so it is doing a good job IMO.

Before you complain, try cleaning up one yourself and you will quickly realise it is good enough.

Why don't you share your portfolio and let us give it a try?

Well you might be the expert. But I'm no expert and I'll tell you, I could remove this watermark from image in 5 minutes.

Watermark is so week anybody can remove it in just a few minutes, i also see a lot of SS, DT, etc images used with watermark in a lot of sites, if they use a week watermark with a hi-resolution image, they will use it more and more without buying anything this is bad for the business

there is no need to search photo, a lot of images buyers  need with resolution 300x200, they  just downsize and few brush tool clicks and is finished.

I think the watermark looks good.  It would take quite a while to remove it yet it is certainly obvious enough to see if people try to use the images with the watermark still there.  If you are going to go to all the work of removing the watermark, it would be a lot simpler to just grab an image from google and get an image without a watermark in the first place.

People who steal photos are going to go to Google for their searches, not download Shutterstock images and spend 20 minutes removing a watermark - people steal because they are lazy.

I think the watermark looks good.  It would take quite a while to remove it yet it is certainly obvious enough to see if people try to use the images with the watermark still there.  If you are going to go to all the work of removing the watermark, it would be a lot simpler to just grab an image from google and get an image without a watermark in the first place.

People who steal photos are going to go to Google for their searches, not download Shutterstock images and spend 20 minutes removing a watermark - people steal because they are lazy.

Well, in part you are right; who buy microstock images wants a licence to use it in commercial use and those who just steal images use it for very low qualiy websites, youtube amateur video, slides, etc... anyway MicroStock images are usually better that random google images, so if you give they the chance, they will download the SS preview...

I chose a background image of mine that's white in the middle. It's fine to use as is. The watermark just looks like I meant to place little bubbles around the perimeter of the image, and on the white portion it just disappears. I dropped some text from another image into the center, and here it is with no retouching whatsoever.

Quote from: VB inc on October 21, 2015, 14:13

For all you guys complaining the watermark is too small. STOP YOUR COMPLAINING. it might be problematic for vectors or illustrations with lots of solid shape areas but for photos, it is very effective watermark as you see the image and also doesnt deter from it.

So you don't care about the problem for vectors (such as graphic icons) and illustration?

I care more for vectors as thats the only thing i contribute. But i tire of the non stop complaining posts in here. My point was for the photgraphers who might be getting overly worried that they might lose some penny sale because an image thief will really come to shutterstock and steal these photos and then spend at minimum 15 minutes to clean up photos that are bigger than the blog small size.

Just count how many small shutterstock logo that you can see on shelmas red bg background. then there the actual word shutterstock then theres all these lines. just pretend you have to spend 5-10 seconds on each element. Even that simple background is time consuming to clean up. Not worth the effort a thief is gonna do to clean that.  Any image 300x200 pixels is a non starter. do it full size and see how long it takes you to clean and view it at 100%

What a stupid move
Very contributer unfriendly move SS

Disappointing

Quote from: Kenny on October 21, 2015, 16:08

That watermark doesn't really serve its purpose on images like these

• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-312063164.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-316072910.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-294187370.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-296280893.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-306799715.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-220400083.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-296785538.jpg
• http://image.shutterstock.com/z/uselesswatermark-313342280.jpg

Wow. Even worse than my example. You can't see the watermark at all.

Yes, ok .  Point taken.
Perhaps they should add a shadow to all their lines so it shows up on both black and while backgrounds!

Just in...new CTO in the house...
http://www.radioandmusic.com/biz/mobile-digital/151020-shutterstock-names-anshu-aggarwal-chief-technology

I'm happy to preview image before buying, but watermark is almost invisible in many photos.