Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
Discussion - Member to Member Sales - Research Center
It's almost as bad as the European fetish for hiding the recipient's name on a hundred-year-old cover for "privacy reasons". The recipient is now well and truly beyond caring, and an interesting addressee can elevate a $1 cover to a $100 cover.
Today's rant ends......
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Likely a misplaced sense of how valuable their cell-phone photos will become, once they hit the big time. 
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
If possible, could you show us some examples?
Why is this done?
Login to Like
this post
If I show examples, it will name names, which I try to avoid doing.
Login to Like
this post
I do not necessarily think it is all bad. It can protect from being reused for certain purposes. If you want an image without the watermark, ask the seller. I had posted some pics from a stamp show and some showed up in two philatelic journals. One gave a vague credit (mentioned the forum) and another did not. I had them watermarked but it was not obtrusive. I remember one cropped out the watermark.
Login to Like
this post
Here's an example, and this guy is by no means the worst culprit
Login to Like
this post
"It can protect being reused. If you want an image without the watermark, ask the seller."
Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused? Copyright may exist for rare/unique items, but not for run-of-the-mill stamps. Scanning artwork created by someone else, and owned by someone else (UPS, Royal Mail etc) doesn't pass copyright to the creator of a scan.Like most of us, I don't have time to ask sellers for a clean image, they should just post one in the first place in my opinion
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
Aye Human Beings have various and many foibles.
Those that put their name as a watermark are obviously from the school of thinking "Any publicity is good publicity".
Login to Like
this post
"Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused?", I would care if it's a rare cancel or uncommon plate variety!
Login to Like
this post
"Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused?""
It is just bad manners or laziness.
Login to Like
this post
If I told you, you'd have to kill me.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Me too- I can't get Mystic to stop sending me cheap stamps despite numerous attempts. I must be stupid
Login to Like
this post
I would suggest you contact the office manager and explain the problem with Mystic!
Login to Like
this post
HOW LONG, I spent telling them to stop that On-Approval stuff.
I sent it back, tracking said delivered, and they said, we never got it! Pay us $125.68!!!
Guess who didn't pay it?
Yeah, I called them, twice, and pestered them, until they stopped.
They will make you feel like a loser, for cancelling. ignore it.
Hope this helps! 
Login to Like
this post
If I was a seller of stamps and concerned about customers returning stamps that were not what was sent, having a watermarked image of the sold item would be important. This is not uncommon to dealers.
It may be unnecessary for low value items but the workflow of scanning them for sale could make it more trouble than it is worth to segregate them.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
That's the best explanation I've heard. I've been a seller for 30 years and it's never once crossed my mind to watermark my images, but I've never had a return either.
Login to Like
this post
NEVER!
Wow, you MUST be doing something right!
I mean, I have not had any sales-returns, but I've only been selling, some 27 years less than you!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Yep, it's been a while. High definition images and accurate descriptions remove most reasons for returns. I offer a no-quibble return policy, and no-one has ever taken me up on it. Hope I haven't jinxed myself now!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
Now that I've got your attention, can someone please explain to me why so many online sellers insist on watermarking their images? As a hunter/collector/seller of EFO's, it peeves me no end when a chunk of the stamp is obliterated by a vanity watermark. What purpose does it serve other than to annoy me?
It's almost as bad as the European fetish for hiding the recipient's name on a hundred-year-old cover for "privacy reasons". The recipient is now well and truly beyond caring, and an interesting addressee can elevate a $1 cover to a $100 cover.
Today's rant ends......
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Am I stupid?
Likely a misplaced sense of how valuable their cell-phone photos will become, once they hit the big time.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Am I stupid?
If possible, could you show us some examples?
Why is this done?
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
If I show examples, it will name names, which I try to avoid doing.
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
I do not necessarily think it is all bad. It can protect from being reused for certain purposes. If you want an image without the watermark, ask the seller. I had posted some pics from a stamp show and some showed up in two philatelic journals. One gave a vague credit (mentioned the forum) and another did not. I had them watermarked but it was not obtrusive. I remember one cropped out the watermark.
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
Here's an example, and this guy is by no means the worst culprit
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
"It can protect being reused. If you want an image without the watermark, ask the seller."
Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused? Copyright may exist for rare/unique items, but not for run-of-the-mill stamps. Scanning artwork created by someone else, and owned by someone else (UPS, Royal Mail etc) doesn't pass copyright to the creator of a scan.Like most of us, I don't have time to ask sellers for a clean image, they should just post one in the first place in my opinion
3 Members
like this post.
Login to Like.
10:52:59am
Auctions - Approvals
re: Am I stupid?
Aye Human Beings have various and many foibles.
Those that put their name as a watermark are obviously from the school of thinking "Any publicity is good publicity".
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
"Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused?", I would care if it's a rare cancel or uncommon plate variety!
Login to Like
this post
12:55:02pm
Auctions - Approvals
re: Am I stupid?
"Who cares if a scan of a common stamp gets reused?""
It is just bad manners or laziness.
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
If I told you, you'd have to kill me.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Am I stupid?
Me too- I can't get Mystic to stop sending me cheap stamps despite numerous attempts. I must be stupid
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
I would suggest you contact the office manager and explain the problem with Mystic!
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Am I stupid?
HOW LONG, I spent telling them to stop that On-Approval stuff.
I sent it back, tracking said delivered, and they said, we never got it! Pay us $125.68!!!
Guess who didn't pay it?
Yeah, I called them, twice, and pestered them, until they stopped.
They will make you feel like a loser, for cancelling. ignore it.
Hope this helps!
Login to Like
this post
re: Am I stupid?
If I was a seller of stamps and concerned about customers returning stamps that were not what was sent, having a watermarked image of the sold item would be important. This is not uncommon to dealers.
It may be unnecessary for low value items but the workflow of scanning them for sale could make it more trouble than it is worth to segregate them.
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Am I stupid?
That's the best explanation I've heard. I've been a seller for 30 years and it's never once crossed my mind to watermark my images, but I've never had a return either.
Login to Like
this post
Approvals
re: Am I stupid?
NEVER!
Wow, you MUST be doing something right!
I mean, I have not had any sales-returns, but I've only been selling, some 27 years less than you!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.
re: Am I stupid?
Yep, it's been a while. High definition images and accurate descriptions remove most reasons for returns. I offer a no-quibble return policy, and no-one has ever taken me up on it. Hope I haven't jinxed myself now!
1 Member
likes this post.
Login to Like.