I want to apply a simle water mark to a image, I tried embeld watermark, but for some reason it doesn't work or atleast I can't see the effect.

Digimark (or is it Digimarc?) software inserts a watermark of some kind, though I've never used it. You pay a hefty price though for each watermark (or whatever mark it is)< SO MY ADVICE WOULD BE TO USE IT WISELY> I BELIEVE PS ^>) COMES WITH A DEMO VERSION OF THE SOFTWARE IN THE FILTERS PANEL SORRY BOUT THE CAPS KEYBOARD IS REALLY MESSIN UP NOW

should've read PS 6.0, sorry again

If you are not worried about money and want to be severely limited in choice then Digimarc watermark is for you. Just click on register and fork over your wallet.

Since you are into graphics or at least photoshop, you can easily make your own watermarks. Something original with meaning for you.

couldn't you just make a new layer, paint in a smiley face in white and then drop the opacity down to less than 50%?

Just a matter of starting a new file. The file dimensions are determined by the watermark size and the spacing between watermarks. The larger the text/image the less marks there will be on page ... the more space around text/image the further away from each other the marks will be, change background to a layer and fill with a solid color, creating a second layer for your text/image (gif with transparent background), add effects to text/image (optional), lower opacity of both layers (each can have a different opacity. You need something around 10-15%), crop if necessary, Select - All, Edit - Define Pattern. Start a new file. Edit - Fill, selecting Pattern from the Contents Use: drop down menu then choose the pattern you just defined from drop down menu. This will fill your new file with your watermark tiled over page.

Urm... digimarc is completely free for up to 99 uses per year (it's the honor system) The version in PS 6.0 is NOT a demo. it is the full blown filter. The only costs that come into play are if you choose the marc spider service, ($79/yr) which is basically a search engine that roams the web looking for your images on sites, or if you mark more than 99 images per year.. At which point the price becomes $149 for up to 999 images (that's like 15 cents per image) While the above mentioned free subscription is only valid for one year, each year they send you a reminder to reactivate the subscription (I've used them for almost 5 years now, and have never paid a dime (then again I only create perhaps a dozen images a year) So, I dunno where the previous posters got these wild ideas about hefty prices, or somehow being limited in choices (did you guys even do a little research?) Btw, the watermark IS invisible. It's a digital watermark, not an optical one. If you want an optical one, just create your watermark image as a new layer, and set the transparency to like 30% or something (as was mentioned above) P.S. if you are some sort of rendering maniac who creates up to 4,999 images / year. The price rises to $529, but the cost per unit drops to a dime ($0.10US)

Very true. What I described was the original meaning of watermark as on quality paper stock. Also, it was not for security. If you want a deterrent for people using your images, you would have to make another layer with your watermark on it. It would be the top layer over your image. You can make it as obvious as you want (changing the opacity). It is just a deterrent to thief of your images as it would take some editing of your image before being able to use it as their own. There are Java Scripts that will disable right clicks on a web page and other security for images being taken. As for digital watermarks, if you have real concerns about copywrite of your images, you would need the search engine that searches out your digital watermark or you would have a rather big job on your hands searching web and reading each image for your watermark (or rely on the honor system). Sorry, i'm not a fan of digital watermarks.

Well, if you want to track theft of images, a digital watermark is the way to go. The MarcSpider service searches for digital watermarks, and logs them. The digital marks will survive most image conversions (bmp to jpeg for example) and at certain settings will even survive being printed out and rescanned. An optical one would only be useful for "demo" images, as once you sell someone an image, you certainly can't have an optical watermark on it. But a digital one won't interfere with the image itself.

Oh, and that javascript crap is worth less than no security at all.. since it gives a "false" sense of security. One could simply make a screenshot, or dig the files out of their browser cache.

Well of course you would not sell an image with a optical watermark on it .. you save the psd file and remove the watermark layer. You would not sell an image with a digital watermark to a client would you? Maybe so, I don't claim to be an expert on the matter of digital watermarking. If you really want to open that can of worms about "that worthless javascript crap", one can simply make a screen shot of your image with the digital watermark. The purpose of my post was not meant to offend anyone. I am not an expert by any means. Everything I learned was by reading and practice.

Well, I suppose it would all depend on how you were selling the image.. I've seen plenty of artists sell images with anti-reproduction clauses. I.E., I can purchase the image, be the sole owner, show it to anyone I want, but not take it, generate a thousand copies, and sell those (or attempt to pass them off as mine) Taking a screenshot of a digitally watermarked image would include the watermark. (depending on the strength of the watermark of course) As I mentioned, many (including certain versions of digimarc (but not the one included in photoshop)) can even survive being printed out, and rescanned. I hope you haven't taken offense to my posts. My intention wasn't to contradict you, it was to simply explain digital watermarking the best I could. It is a technology that fascinates me. I'll be the first to admit that it certainly isn't appropriate for every situation, especially images that have large blocks of solid color or when you are doing work for hire. But of all the current technologies, it is probably the most versatile, and the great thing, is that if someone does steal your work, I seriously doubt they are going to check for a watermark, which means, you've got 'em nailed to the wall when it comes time to present evidence.

well I just have a foot up my ass now dont i? Sorry bout the misinformation.