6 comments on “Digimarc digital watermarking

  1. Digimarc still does not work properly. Nothing seems to have changed. What Digimarc sells does not work. I cannot write a (simple) report to just exclude images that are shown on my own site. They would be there after all, wouldn’t they……

    Here is Digimarc Customer Support’s verbatim response sent today.

    “Thank you for your email.

    I apologize for your poor experience with Licensestream and content tracker. Licensestream is a third party vendor that we have been experiencing these issues with this past year and we are currently re-evaluating our relationship with them.

    Please let me know if I can be of further assistance to you.”

    What a load of rubbish.

  2. Yes, Digimarc’s technology sucks. I use to work there years ago, long before this article was written.

    Once upon a time they managed to sucker a few companies into putting their watermarking tech into magazine ads. The thought was that someone reading that magazine would be readily willing to get up off the couch, fire up their PC, and scan an ad with a webcam so Digimarc’s software could open a browser and take them to the advertisers web site. Getting a decent scan required perfect lighting conditions and only a few types of webcams were supported. It only worked about 50% of the time. I told them back then it was a bad idea, they didn’t listen.

    During my tenure there was a large influx of investment capital keeping the company afloat. The way that company wasted those funds was mind boggling; outlandish company off-sites, unnecessary upgrades to the network infrastructure, high end computer “gaming” systems for the developers so they could play games over the LAN. Eventually those funds dried up and a lot of people were laid off, I was one of them and it really made my day as I was happy to be leaving with a nice severance.

    The thing that upset me the most was that I left a great job with a great company where I was well known and respected to work for that POS company. Back then I considered Digimarc nothing more than a stock scam and still do to this day. It really surprises me that they are still around.

  3. Pingback: Digimarc Digital Watermarking revisited | fromadifferentangle.net

  4. Pingback: Tweets that mention Digimarc digital watermarking | fromadifferentangle.net -- Topsy.com

  5. Sam, if you couldn’t tell any difference, especially in the blue images, then it must be just your eyes.

    As for the big piece of text over your photos: that works (for me) on this blog here, but if you’re for example a stock photographer and upload material to a stock site, you can’t put that big piece of text there.
    Digital watermarking could be a solution, but with this amount of noise an image wouldn’t pass the quality check.

  6. If you’re prepared to put a big piece of text over your photos, then why are you bothered by a tiny bit of noise?

    It could just be my eyes (or high desktop resolution), but I couldn’t tell any difference – and even those who can, I’m sure they’d agree that it’s preferable to having a banner in the middle of the image…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *