Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
really? I didn't know that!

Obviously, but I want to use it on my desktop and the signature takes away from the whole picture.
 
really? I didn't know that!

Obviously, but I want to use it on my desktop and the signature takes away from the whole picture.

Here's one of them that I got done. I'll try to get the other one done later when I get time. You're welcome.
 

Attachments

  • guitar2.jpg
    guitar2.jpg
    197.3 KB · Views: 116
thanks but no thanks. I need someone with actual skill. anyone could've done that :cool:
 
thanks but no thanks. I need someone with actual skill. anyone could've done that :cool:

As someone earlier said, those signatures are there for a reason. They are a kind of watermark the site uses. I bet the site says somewhere that they are not to be copied and used or something along those lines. Also it's probably not that hard to erase it. Just use content aware fill.
 
No self-respecting pro is going to do that for you dude. Someone took the time to make those wallpapers like that for a reason.

Plus, it wouldn't be as easy as it seems like it would be to remove the watermark from the tan one.
 
THX1139 said:
Here's one of them that I got done. I'll try to get the other one done later when I get time. You're welcome.
I hate to laugh at the OPs expense, but this was hilarious.

No self-respecting pro is going to do that for you dude. Someone took the time to make those wallpapers like that for a reason.

Exactly. If you have the skills to remove it then you probably have respect for the effort that went into creating it. That said, it's not particularly difficult to remove if you know what you're doing, so OP, download a photoshop trial and have at it -- just don't expect any pros to help you violate copyright.
 

Attachments

  • watermarked.jpg
    watermarked.jpg
    262.8 KB · Views: 118
HAI! I actually wanted to help you out... all these people being mean and stuffz, and I was almost finishedesded but then that thing appeared and I didn't dare continue.
So... well...
 

Attachments

  • 5.jpg
    5.jpg
    185.9 KB · Views: 139
... all these people being mean and stuffz ...

Being mean?

I thought they were being helpful, in the usual forumish-snarky way.

HAI! Did you know there's a website called iStock.com that gives away all kinds of free photos (like the one below) to anybody with the PS skills to remove their 'X' and logo?

Free.

Sweet.

:rolleyes:
 

Attachments

  • nerd in love with beautiful girl play a serenade song Royalty Free Stock Photo.jpeg
    nerd in love with beautiful girl play a serenade song Royalty Free Stock Photo.jpeg
    59.2 KB · Views: 109
OP; I have this in my desktop image gallery with no signature on it. It has all the camera data so it hasn't been PhotoShopped. The photo dates to 2009, so it probably pre-dates the DailyGuitar desktop.

PM me if you want it.

Dale

Edit: This isn't a joke post.
 
The ironic thing is that the site doesnt own a single one of those photos and people are bitching about copyright. The real offense here is putting watermarks on crap you didnt make (unless of course dailyguitar.com is indeed the creator of House).
 
^^^ Nothing in the Daily Guitar Archives is older than 2010 and the photo date is actually 2007, not 2009. It has no copyright, either.

Dale
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2011-04-06 at 12.29.41 PM.png
    Screen shot 2011-04-06 at 12.29.41 PM.png
    84.6 KB · Views: 101
^^^ Nothing in the Daily Guitar Archives is older than 2010 and the photo date is actually 2007, not 2009. It has no copyright, either.

Cool. So feel free to make the adjustments requested by the OP.

He/she will appreciate your efforts.
 
HAI! I actually wanted to help you out... all these people being mean and stuffz, and I was almost finishedesded but then that thing appeared and I didn't dare continue.
So... well...

lol ... awesome post ... creative genius. :cool:
 
^^^ Nothing in the Daily Guitar Archives is older than 2010 and the photo date is actually 2007, not 2009. It has no copyright, either.

Dale

Ok so all that flaming was uncalled for. Now what did we learn today class? Never make assumptions without checking.

If someone could remove the watermark for me now, I would still greatly appreciate it.
 
Ok so all that flaming was uncalled for. Now what did we learn today class? Never make assumptions without checking.

If someone could remove the watermark for me now, I would still greatly appreciate it.

Speaking of not making assumptions, how do you know that the creator of that image didn't license it to the site that placed the watermark on it?
 
Ok so all that flaming was uncalled for. Now what did we learn today class? Never make assumptions without checking.

Perhaps YOU learned a lesson today.

Perhaps you learned that BEFORE asking people to alter an image that YOU should establish whether you have the rights to do so AND be ready to show some form of proof to that fact.

Perhaps you learned that lesson.

But I highly doubt it.
 
Speaking of not making assumptions, how do you know that the creator of that image didn't license it to the site that placed the watermark on it?

And how would the site manage to secure rights to distribute images from major TV shows under its own name?
 
Whether DailyGuitar.com legally or illegally used those images is not really at the heart of this matter. There is no lesson for us to learn other than:

Do not modify or use another person's work without proper licensing.
 
This whole argument/thread seems a little silly. We're talking about desktop wallpaper that the OP wants to put on his personal computer! FREE desktop wallpaper, at that.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.