I loath them. I know people steal stuff but it's the risk of exposing one's art to a wider audience so my feeling is "get over it or don't bother".

--
Machines were mice and men were lions once upon a time, but now that it's the opposite, it's twice upon a time. - Moondog

I don't discard good art because of a silly watermark. If you can't enjoy a piece of art because there's some transparent watermark over it, then go do something else.

It's even worse when you combine it with a microscopically small size as well so that the whole thing is under the watermark. It makes me wanna cry.

--
Dani | *DarkMaidenofSorrow | ~DarkMaiden-Stock

Oh definitely or the central most important part of the piece is obscured making the image just awful. So annoying.

--
Machines were mice and men were lions once upon a time, but now that it's the opposite, it's twice upon a time. - Moondog

I understand the need to watermark things, but i find them extremely distracting and ugly.

I get the need, but it's really hard to judge the quality of a piece if there's a huge honking thing obscuring the focal point. It's not so much an issue in an all-over design, or something off centered. But I've run into several photos where the only element is centered and I can't even tell if it's in focus, let alone has personality.

--
"These days there are angry ghosts all around us--dead from wars... sickness... starvation... and nobody cares. So you say you're under a curse? Well so what, so's the whole damn world." -- Princess Mononoke

Heh, "large obscuring" - there is some bias in the question already But it is understandable, watermarks can be annoying.

They don't spoil the art, it is still visible, but they tell me something about the artist - and here I can't judge, because I don't know what they went through that causes them to cover their art with such things.

It is still very dissapointing, but doesn't stop me from seeing, appreciating and, ultimately, "fav"-ing

I support watermarking.

The only thing that bothers me is when the full view size of an image is so small, and there's a HUGE watermark covering the entire thing. A watermark shouldn't be overly large, and I think should be placed in an area on an image so it's clearly seen but doesn't obstruct the viewer from enjoying the work.

--
<sub>Admitting Doctor for #Dark-Arts-Asylum
Co-conspirator of =timerelease-ue

---
I'm a perfectionist, and perfect is a skinned knee.</sub>

I wasn't referring to all watermarks, just the ones that take up a lot of room and make the artwork hard to see, which is why I said "large, obscuring" . I was just curious as to how much of an issue that kind of watermark is for people being able to appreciate an artwork.

--
Dani | *DarkMaidenofSorrow | ~DarkMaiden-Stock