Mall pictures have watermarks now

[stiltman]

We went to Picture People to get some X-mas pictures. I get a 8x10 and 10x13 for free part of a deal we had when StiltmanII was first born. So we get some awsome pictures blue background and we're wearing red thermal shirts and blue jeans. They turned out great!

Get home and scan them at 800dpi and do some minor photoshoping (Photoshop CS) to clean them up a little more. Save them as TIFs and JPGs. Go down to the photo shop to print them and long behold at the bottom of both pictures is a white bar with part of the file name (verified this later) Can't save the originals the picts like that

Go back home and redo EVERYTHING in Photoshop 7, as I heard but forgot about the new stuff they put in CS about digital watermarks. Go back down to the photo place and try it again. Same damn thing. This is how I confirmed the watermark takes the file name, as they were different.

Now the whole reason to take them to the photo place is that I can get them printed for a lot less than my R200 will do it. My R200 can do it without the watermarks. That doesn't really solve the problem of having a quality picture that wont bleed from water and that will last a long time.

Anyone deal with this before? Did you find a way to backup your original photo so it could be printed later just in case the original was damaged?
Picture People only keep your originals for a year

[adam]

stiltman what you are trying to do is illegal. You entered into a contract with them. If you want additional copies you have to go through them. I know it sounds bizarre to some people but they have the copyright in YOUR picture and have the exclusive right to make additional copies as a matter of law.

It does suck if they only retain originals for a year as a general rule, but that agreed upon time period is part of your contract and was used in determining the price that you paid. I'm sure the term is negotiable. You can request that they retain it longer for a price, or you can try to purchase the copyright in the pictures from them, in which case they would give you the negatives I presume.

[flaninacupboard]

I used to work for a photographic chain, copyright was sold out at £150 per negative.

Easier way round, call customer services and ask if you can buy some extra prints as your son has died. they'll give you a "death package" for free and move your negatives to permenant storage.

These firms lose money on folks who just have a sitting with free print. hit them hard in the pocket since scanners and printers have been available at home.

[stiltman]

Called them up and they said they couldn't help me. They suggest I buy a bunch of copies and store them in different places...jerks

Oh well, I'm pretty sure I'll find a work around

[spiderman2k1]

I worked at a place called "Expressly Portraits" allot of people never even new this but its cheaper to buy the negatives and bring them to a photo lab. You have to bring them to a Professional photo lab. Look in your Yellow pages these labs almost do nothing but webbing film and family portraits. Ask if they develop 120 and 220 film. Getting pictures at Sears sucks they use 35mm and change 100 dollars for one negative. This way you can own the rights once you buy the negative. "Expressly Portraits" are in most malls but I think some might have closed down.

[spiderman2k1]

Just look this info up it seems they just changed there name you might want to call them to find out where there home office is to find a store where you live.

http://www.shoptysons.com/searchstore/index.cfm?fuseaction=view&storeid=338

The Picture People

Description/Specialty:
Formerly Expressly Portraits, the Picture People specialize in photographic portraits of individuals, families, pets, and groups. Frames and framing accessories; and customer hair and makeup enhancement for portrait sittings are also available.

Category:
General Merchandise/Services

Mall Location:
Section P: Lower Level, Rainforest Cafe Wing

Telephone #:
(703) 790-5297

Web Address:
www.picturepeople.com

[stiltman]

Just got ahold of the manager. i can buy the whole roll of negitives for $60...not bad, I can live with that.

I noticed that they do not do 4 x 6 in pictures, just 10x13, 8x10, 5x7....is that because of the film they use? Would buying the roll and taking it to my photo lab, would they be able to make 4 x 6's with out cropping off the top and bottom?

[Conquest10]

Would buying the roll and taking it to my photo lab, would they be able to make 4 x 6's with out cropping off the top and bottom?

I would assume so. Just tell them not to crop anything.

[rallynavvie]

stiltman what you are trying to do is illegal. You entered into a contract with them. If you want additional copies you have to go through them. I know it sounds bizarre to some people but they have the copyright in YOUR picture and have the exclusive right to make additional copies as a matter of law.

It does suck if they only retain originals for a year as a general rule, but that agreed upon time period is part of your contract and was used in determining the price that you paid. I'm sure the term is negotiable. You can request that they retain it longer for a price, or you can try to purchase the copyright in the pictures from them, in which case they would give you the negatives I presume.

Agreed, I used to deal with this sort of thing all the time in the copy biz. We have the authority to outright refuse a picture for photo calendars, greeting cards, or even making a basic black & white copy of it if it even looks like it was professionally taken. We usually waive that if the photo is being used for a funeral and the photo is of the deceased, but it would be low to take advantage of that as we can still get in trouble for using a professional photo in that situation.

If you get the negatives from that place make sure to also obtain a written release to reprint the photos since just having negatives does not equal having permission to reprint the professionally-taken photos on them.

[lordsmurf]

Would buying the roll and taking it to my photo lab, would they be able to make 4 x 6's with out cropping off the top and bottom?

I would assume so. Just tell them not to crop anything.

No. A 35mm is not a cozy ratio like 4x6
Print it full-frame, then chop off the edges.
This is usually a custom service.

[adamthole]

I don't understand how this is possible. The picture looks normal, you scan it into your computer, do some editing with Photoshop, and everything looks great. However when you take it to be printed it ends up with a watermark on it?

Perhaps I am missing something, but your post makes it sound like the printers will only have the watermark on certain pictures that have been watermarked.

I don't understand how this is possible. Am I missing something?

[Conquest10]

Would buying the roll and taking it to my photo lab, would they be able to make 4 x 6's with out cropping off the top and bottom?

I would assume so. Just tell them not to crop anything.

No. A 35mm is not a cozy ratio like 4x6
Print it full-frame, then chop off the edges.
This is usually a custom service.

Isn't that what I said?

[lordsmurf]

I guess it was.

[aanaravs]

I don't understand how this is possible. The picture looks normal, you scan it into your computer, do some editing with Photoshop, and everything looks great. However when you take it to be printed it ends up with a watermark on it?

Perhaps I am missing something, but your post makes it sound like the printers will only have the watermark on certain pictures that have been watermarked.

I don't understand how this is possible. Am I missing something?

I am also interested in knowing about this. Does anyone have any opinions?

[mrtristan]

I was thinking the same thing, so I read through the post a couple more times. It seems like the problem lies between photoshop and the printer's machine.

That doesn't really make sense either, though. If print companies can't produce pictures from photoshop files without watermarks, wouldn't they stand to go out of business?

[stiltman]

My printer Epson R200 will print them just fine,
However, printing from the printer is not the same as a photo machine at the photolab.

I did some more tests too

Scanned pict at 800dpi...edit in photoshop...save to CD...watermark shows up at photo lab

take same file print on R200, no water mark

Take that print out and scan it 800dpi save to CD and watermark shows up at photolab

Take that file (scan of a scan) and edit in photoshop to remove all background (blue canvas) save to CD and watermark shows up at photo lab.

Now I'm going to start taking parts of it till I can narrow down were the info is being placed in the pixels (yellow I think)

[Conquest10]

Have you taken a regular image that you shot to that lab?

[stiltman]

Have you taken a regular image that you shot to that lab?

oh yeah, all the time.
Actually, I tried the original scan at three different places, but they all happened to use the same Kodak machines that print to a fugi developer.

DOH!

[tekkieman]

You mean you haven't been scanning this at your own scanner?

[stiltman]

You mean you haven't been scanning this at your own scanner?

Oh yeah, everything has been done on my computer. I just upload everything via CD to the kodak machine...Not the one the does the printing and scaning. All it does is take your digitals from whatever media you have and sends it to a film processor they have in the backroom. I'm pretty sure it's a fugi machine though.

BTW, I picked up the negatives last night. They didn't make me sign anything and I forgot to ask if I have full rights to reprint

I haven't had a chance to scan the negative to see if the watermark is actually embedded in it though

[adamthole]

So apparently this technology is embedded in the photo. Is there a certain name for this? Or is it something we aren't supposed to know about?

[tonyiws]

So apparently this technology is embedded in the photo. Is there a certain name for this? Or is it something we aren't supposed to know about?

http://www.hardwaregeeks.com/articles.php?action=show&showarticle=44
http://www.peimag.com/pdf/pei01/pei0501/binderpei0501.pdf
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/technologyFeatures/aboutDW.shtml
http://www.digimarc.com/watermark/about/

[mrtristan]

Dude, that's crazy. So any scan of the picture at a quality worth reprinting from will be succeptible to the watermark. That's pure genious, man.

[mrtristan]

Hey, I just had an idea. If you were to break the image up into CMYK, maybe you'd have an easier time detecting the watermark. I don't know if there's a way to save each layer as a separate image, then combine, but it might work, if you can identify which color is the culprit. I'm guessing not, but worth a try.

Even though you have the negatives, I'm interested if you can break the watermark protection.

[lordsmurf]

You cannot watermark negatives.
Well, you can, but ... just no. Not this time. Not here.

This thread is getting nutsy-cookoo.

Just scan the things and print them.
Take them to the corner photomat and get them printed.

What's the big deal?

[spiderman2k1]

stiltman if its 120 that film format does not do 4*6 they can do 4*5 but they just do not print them there

Just got ahold of the manager. i can buy the whole roll of negitives for $60...not bad, I can live with that.

I noticed that they do not do 4 x 6 in pictures, just 10x13, 8x10, 5x7....is that because of the film they use? Would buying the roll and taking it to my photo lab, would they be able to make 4 x 6's with out cropping off the top and bottom?

[tekkieman]

My printer Epson R200 will print them just fine

Just scan the things and print them.
Take them to the corner photomat and get them printed.

D'oh

Brilliant!

[stiltman]

My printer Epson R200 will print them just fine

Just scan the things and print them.
Take them to the corner photomat and get them printed.

D'oh

Brilliant!

Brilliant! ??

Doesn't work, if you read through what I did.

[tekkieman]

My printer Epson R200 will print them just fine

Just scan the things and print them.
Take them to the corner photomat and get them printed.

D'oh

Brilliant!

Brilliant! ??

Doesn't work, if you read through what I did.

That's exactly why I quoted you! You said your epson prints them fine. You never said you took that print to the photo lab and and tried to print. Although looking back on your posts, you did say you printed from the epson and rescanned it to take the file to the print lab. What happens if you take the epson print to the lab and try to print it? This is what smurf said.

[stiltman]

What happens if you take the epson print to the lab and try to print it? This is what smurf said.

Watermark shows up