Re: Protecting Images-

Ok, 'listened long enough. Now I have to add my two cents worth.

Imagine a really nice photo realistic image.

printed right across it in a pretty font that matches *one* of the colors
present in the image:

COPYRIGHT 1998 BLA-BLA Co.
ALL Rights reserved

Now granted this in it's self would be simple to nuke - however, it _would_
be darned difficult to "clone" the image back over the "missing" parts
(where the font was) well enough to _not_ look like

1) A pre-schooler had made the picture.
2) *Something* relevant had not been removed

Thus it's my humble opinion that with NOT an "invisible" method of
protecting an image, it's none the less quite effective.

To further validate my opinion I _do_ have a stock photo agency's site.
They have "a few" folks that are pretty sharp in Photo Shop. NONE of them
were able to remove the font placed on the image and make it look like it
was never there without _substantially_ altering the image - thus they were
pretty happy about "my method" of protecting their stuff and proceeded to
post _hundreds_ of their images on the web for sale or "rent".

HTH,
Fuzzy


__________________________________________________________________
Captain F.M. O'Lary
(yes, one of the now infamous: "O'Lary Boys")
webmaster(at)canopy.net
sysop(at)mail.ruediger.leon.k12.fl.us
Member of the HTML Writers Guild and 
International Webmasters Association
------------------------------------------------------------------

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA