So, I took notice that Caedes is rated as the second best Wallpaper Site at www.wallpaperreview.com! Is nr.1 really that much better -backgroundsarchive.com?
I suppose Wallpaper Review doesn't make art first priority for the Wallpaper Sites they review!
Amnesia, I think it means that not everyone wants to use pictures with copyright logos that block out everything as their desktop backgrounds, so that is probably why they include it in the reviews.
Have you hugged PINER lately? He is a hard-working,
FUN guy....in a TOUGH job..
His job to keep us under control! You know we make it tough....so please thank and hug him today!
While I used to be against copyrights on images, after having been involved in the Vigilante Justice forum and seeing the wide rips of people's art (generally not as well protected as ours), I use them on mine now. I'm happy to see them on other's images to, I just prefer that they are discreet enough not to interfere with the image. 8•)
As far as the invisible watermarks… some exist, but I think the "copyright" is a larger deterrent to rips, and easier to prove when a rip does occur.
In Window's, since the toolbar is in the lower part of the screen -a copyright signature in the lower right corner will be covered! A picture will look nice as a Desktop Wallpaper and still be protected by the copyright signature. I think that's a good place to put a copyright signature.
Nr. 1, Backrounds Archive, at Wallpaper Review TOP 20 also have copyright signature on some of their wallpapers.
I suppose Wallpaper Review doesn't make art first priority for the Wallpaper Sites they review!