4 ms·
> No one is forcing you to pay for ads on Google Shopping so you're free to do whatever Did I say otherwise? > why would you invest a ton of money into qualit
by maratd 13y ago
> No one is forcing you to pay for ads on Google Shopping so you're free to do whatever
Did I say otherwise?
> why would you invest a ton of money into quality photography and then cover it up with a watermark?
To make sure that this quality photography stays as a competitive asset or if used by others, turns into advertising for my store.
> If you're selling exactly what everyone else is selling the competitive point is customer service and price
When you're selling something online, photography is most certainly a differentiator. It is also a substantial barrier to entry for the competition, because quality photography is difficult and expensive.
> Such stores generally use the manufacturer's images anyways.
Manufacturer images, when they exist, are almost always terrible. Having good photos to clearly show off the product and everything included is the difference between a buyer clicking BUY and having them wander off.
- Spoom 13y agoUse a digital watermark. You lose the advertising edge if competitors use it but you can prove that the copyright belongs to you and force them to take it down.
- mark-r 13y agoGetting them to take it down is more trouble than it's worth, even if it works. You'll be playing whack-a-mole all day long. Ideally you want them not to use it in the first place, and a visible watermark accomplishes that.
- simoncion 13y ago> Use a digital watermark. As opposed to those analog watermarks that we've all be hand-applying to our JPEGs? :)
- Spoom 13y agoDigital watermarks are typically invisible. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_watermarking
- simoncion 13y agoThe results from this search are at odds with your assertion: http://images.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=watermarked+images http://images.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=watermarked+image... Regardless, you seem to have missed the gentle humour in my original post.