Galaxian wrote:It would have been a beautiful image had not the creator decided to mar it with his ownership details. True, cutting off a chunk isn't too onerous but that rather spoils the owners original work and I'm not sure that's strictly legal. Don't people know they can watermark images invisibly?
Watermarks are used to avoid copyright infringements. In this case, the author simply wants to "sign" the image - which is what you don't like - and he chose one of the areas where it could less interfere with the view of the photograph as a whole (usually that's one of the lower corners). I know because I'm the author
No need to start a debate, we all have our preferences.
Thank you for explaining and thank you for sharing.
It is a gorgeous image of a lovely part of our Galaxy but you are right, I'm petty and pouty and I want all my freebies to be perfect and I don't like signatures on images, or paintings. It's like the DOGs, digital online graphics, TV companies use as IDents and teasers. Five thousand SFX guys spend ten years getting something just right, two actors work their butts off to portray deep emotion in a blank room in front of a green screen and the dumb TV guys cut their heads off, run a crawler over the effects and generally ruin it. A small signature isn't in that class but it's still obtrusive to nitpickerry perfectionists.
I don't feel right cutting off a signature, that feels vaguely like vandalism of a mild sort but if I could magically extinguish the TV DOGs I would.
And you're right, I shouldn't have mentioned it.