40 
Watermarks are the annoying result of people stealing pictures—they’re ugly, distracting and cheapen the art of photography. But it’s a necessary evil! Or is it? Kip Praslowicz poked fun at the ugly watermarks ruining pictures these days by plastering them over famous photos. It’s not a good look.
Idle thought today while at work was how it seems like many amateur photographs spend more time putting elaborate watermarks on their images than they do making images worth stealing. This led to a second thought that I don’t really recall ever seeing the photographs of famous art photographers with a gaudy watermark
Which obviously led to:
Check out more of these hilariously butchered pictures at Kip Praslowicz’ website. [Kip Praslowicz via PetaPixel]
If Superheroes Were Sponsored By Famous Brands
Changing Famous Logos to Comic Sans Ruins Every Logo
Famous Photos Taken As Selfies Are So Damn Hilarious
Sigh… Whatever happened to this being a tech site..? Some of these articles are just stupid and pointless.
Been a few random ones recently.
It’s as tech BLOG. Get it right.
Oh and in case you didn’t notice, police stories have nothing to do with tech either.
If you find an article stupid or pointless you don’t have to read it, I think its nice to have a few articles of a different nature just as an interesting diversion, ‘Notes from the front line’ is a must read for me and its not specifically tech-based.
You don’t really recall ever seeing the photographs of famous art photographers with a gaudy watermark because you mostly see them on sites that have stolen them.
Good luck posting images without a watermark when it’s your livelihood at stake.
“Watermarks are the annoying result of people stealing pictures”
no. they’re the result of anally retentive photographers who are terrified at the thought of someone using their precious snaps without paying