Remove watermarks from a jpg

quazzy

Hi All,

A friend got married recently and I wanted a few of the photos. However, the CD that they received with the photos has "Proof" written across all the photos and hence they can't print off any extra photos. They got the standard 2 or 3 sets for themselves and respective families. The guy told them that he can take this "Proof" off the photos but it will cost 1000 euro!!!

I only want about 20 images and have no access to a scanner to copy the originals.

So the question is:

Is there any software out there that can remove the "PROOF" from the jpg image without loosing too much of the image quality?

I can attach one of the jpgs if it helps anyone.

Hope you all can help
Regards
Quazzy

Hobbes

Try the photoshoppage forum and post one. I am very surprised that they gave backup pictures but then felt the need to deface them for extortion later.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=356

Hagar

If your friends contracted a professional photographer to do their wedding they agreed the rates/costs per set with him before hand, regardless of how expensive you feel these rates are.

To attempt to remove the proof marks from these photos and deprive the photographer of his livelihood is theft . Pure and simple. I don't think this topic should be entertained further. Boards.ie cannot be seen to condone or promote theft.

quazzy

Hagar wrote:

If your friends contracted a professional photographer to do their wedding they agreed the rates/costs per set with him before hand, regardless of how expensive you feel these rates are.

To attempt to remove the proof marks from these photos and deprive the photographer of his livelihood is theft . Pure and simple. I don't think this topic should be entertained further. Boards.ie cannot be seen to condone or promote theft.

Sorry...Didn't mean to cause a problem.

TBH I dont know what the photographer agreed with my friend but she didn't seem too happy about the watermarks on the digital photos. But thats another story.

Mods, feel free to close and lock this thread if deemed necessary.

Again, Sorry for the trouble.

Regards
Quazzy

iregk

Most likely he woudl have done them in Adobe Photoshop (standard issue for serious photographers) which allows you to do layers in photos, along the lines to paint shop pro. The Proof would simply be another layer and easily removed.

Oriel

iregk,
He's hardly going to give them the original photoshop file.
I'd go the opposite, I'd say that they are large jpeg files and that there is nothing you can realistically do about it.

S.

stevenmu

I could be very wrong here but I don't think .jpg can handle the transparent layers needed for watermarking, the image would have had to have been 'flattened' when saving as a jpg, meaning the watermark is fully integrated into the image. The only thing to do would be to get the originals from the photographer.

Tbh OP, I think this is a complete rip-off by the photographer, your friends payed (probably very good) money for digital photos of their wedding, not digital photos with a watermark superimposed. I'd be having serious words with the photographer and considering legal action to get hold of the originals (and re-reading any contracts signed very carefully).

quazzy

stevenmu wrote:

I could be very wrong here but I don't think .jpg can handle the transparent layers needed for watermarking, the image would have had to have been 'flattened' when saving as a jpg, meaning the watermark is fully integrated into the image. The only thing to do would be to get the originals from the photographer.

Tbh OP, I think this is a complete rip-off by the photographer, your friends payed (probably very good) money for digital photos of their wedding, not digital photos with a watermark superimposed. I'd be having serious words with the photographer and considering legal action to get hold of the originals (and re-reading any contracts signed very carefully).

I still don't know the "in's and out's" of what was agreed it was a few months ago at this stage and the guy was prob. booked a few months before that. But I'll get her to check if there have any docs or contracts etc.

Hagar

I think you will find that the photgrapher contracted to supply a printed Wedding Album and X sets of printed photos. The digital proofs are just that, ie "proofs". You select an agreed number for an agreed price and these are printed and supplied to you. The original digital photgraphs are the equivalent of negatives and are legally the property of the photographer unless agreed otherwise in writing.

I must admit I do think €1000 for the originals is a total rip off. That sort of crap gets decent photographers a bad name.

Hobbes

Had a look at one of the photos and pulled out the proof bit.

It is possible to photoshop this out without any serious damage to the photo, however it would be a bit of work and certainly a lot of work for a photo album.

You would be better off scanning. Check your email.

Syth

It wasn't the photographers wedding, it was your friend's wedding. He does have the right to use their wedding, a very important time in their life, to make money.

As people have said, you won't be able to remove the watermark from the digital pictures without a lot of hard work and/or professional help. It'd be a lot better to scan in the photos. Try asking photo shops if they have a high quality scanner, they can probably scan in the original printed photos (for a fee of course, but a lot less than €1,000).

dalk

Just as an aside to this discussion. There are photo shops in the US that now refuse to scan/copy pictures for you that look too 'professional'. Just in case you are infinging somebodys copyright...

Khannie

quazzy wrote:

Mods, feel free to close and lock this thread if deemed necessary.

I understand that you don't want to pay the money, but you're effectively trying to steal copyright, so I'm closing this.