No watermark

[lejoueurdepipeau]

Yeah, I agree that consistency would be good! I've only had two marks in my time the red one and the blackcurrant one. Started to change one to the other after the new one arrived but rapidly lost the will to live - and haven't regained the enthusiasm since.

[bykimbo]

I'd be interested to hear what the official line is on what they're supposed to achieve.

[astral276]

I'd be interested to hear what the official line is on what they're supposed to achieve.

I suppose it come under the section of the T&Cs that read:

You give us a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, irrevocable, sublicenseable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise all copyright and publicity rights, in any existing or future media, known or unknown, over the material or User Data displayed in Your listings or bids.

So although the original images belong to the originator the ones displayed on the eBid site belong to eBid and therefore carry their brand. It's legalese though so I may be baffled.

[raindropsies]

Personally I would like all watermarks that are not added personally to be banished.

If people want a watermark on their items then people would add one (wouldn't they?)

I could add a watermark when taking the actual photo with just one click of my new camera. I just don't want one.

Also just as an opinion, when eBid add their "mark" it makes it look as they "own" the picture which I don't think they do (do they?)

[astral276]

I hope the cropping system is an OPTION only. I would much rather be able to use a totally different photograph for the gallery and main picture rather than use a section of the main for the gallery.

I'd agree with that. Sometimes, even when the item fills the original image it makes no sense when reduced to a thumbnail. The ability to define a separate image for the thumbnail, with a default to the first image if no gallery image is defined, would be useful.

Not sure if doing that would have any repercussions with regard to what is uploaded to Google though. Maybe one of those things where eBid are better placed to know what is best - even if us rabble think otherwise.

[deltadelta48]

Personally I would like all watermarks that are not added personally to be banished.

If people want a watermark on their items then people would add one (wouldn't they?)

I could add a watermark when taking the actual photo with just one click of my new camera. I just don't want one.

Also just as an opinion, when eBid add their "mark" it makes it look as they "own" the picture which I don't think they do (do they?)

Yes, but it is not an "own" photo thing, its an advertising thing. Photo is first thing potential buyer looks at, the ebid logo makes it clear what site it is. Since most of our listings go out on the net, that is a good thing to add. How site is arranged, watermarked or no, is ebid's right. Great they are removing watermarks that block photo details, but we can't expect all of them to be removed or given option to take all of them off. They do serve a purpose for ebid and for sellers too.

Some of us with one-of-a-kind items don't worry about the watermark being removed, no one can use our photos anyway. But for others w/ popular items, they have to guard their pictures from being used all over the web. For these people, they should do the marking themselves. Easy to do. But they can't expect ebid to allow them to remove all the logo/watermark because they are not effective on their items. They are still an advertisement for ebid.