<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title><![CDATA[Photo Stamp Remover 5.0 comments:]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/</link>
<description><![CDATA[free licensed software daily]]></description>
<language>en</language>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 05:45:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
<atom:link href="https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
<generator>FeedWriter</generator>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Vulcan Tourist]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166735</link>
<description><![CDATA[This software is really quite useless unless one is willing to accept a lower degree of quality in the final result than what can be done with generalized image editing software and a bit of time.  As a test, I chose an image from my Samsung camera which had a green-and-yellow datestamp in the lower right corner.  This was in fact the primary usage case I imagined when I decided to install this software; I have no need nor desire to play copyright god with others' images.

I kept the process simple, since in actual use I would expect it to be able to perform acceptably in this scenario with a minimum of interaction from me, otherwise it defeats the purpose.  I imported the image, created a rectangular selection mask around the date stamp, and then selected the remove function.  The software spent no more than 15 seconds analyzing the image and then rendered the result.

Most of the resulting blend was nominally acceptable, but about 15% of it was blended much more poorly than I could have done manually, and it was a clearly visible anomaly.  The result was not an acceptable compromise to performing the same manually.  Thus even though the software had no cost in this instance I would still not use it.  I would use GIMP for Windows to do the work, which is open source and also no cost.  Actually it's also possible I would wind up just never doing it at all unless I was desperate to un-stamp a single isolated photo.]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2012 01:45:31 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166735</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vulcan Tourist]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: tranmontane]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166734</link>
<description><![CDATA[#53, Ric.  Quite agree -- with watermark removal software (of which it seems this is hardly the best example) a photographer can  "lose" his/her "copyright" almost instantly.  And there are certainly some -- maybe quite a few -- who will remove a watermarked copyright notice in order to use or sell on a "useful" photograph THAT IS NOT THEIRS.

However, apart from saying, "Use something better", you provide no useful solution -- if you know of one/some, please elucidate for the benefit of professional photographers on this site.

Because as far as I know, the only really effective way to (almost) guarantee your photos won't be ripped off is to ensure that only LOW RESOLUTION versions are made publicly available.  Although for reasons already given, it is hard for many of us to do that.

There is really only one reason to put a watermarked copyright notice on a photograph -- to serve notice to anyone even thinking about stealing it, that it is NOT offered "free" to the public.  Just in case they are so naive as to think that it IS.

Tranmontane]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2012 00:37:29 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166734</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[tranmontane]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Billy Kurch]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166733</link>
<description><![CDATA[I'm afraid that my comment is a bit late in the day. However, I just wanted my say concerning this tool. I wanted to say that this tool is useful in a number of legitimate ways for making minor corrections with graphics. As for someone using this tool to use a watermarked or copyright marked photo or other graphic, that's obviously another story.
I've been down this road a few times, and the law and our court systems are notoriously lame, when it comes to enforcing our rights under a copyright or watermark claim.  Generally, people have the right to quiet and private enjoyment of your works, copyrights or not! Thanks to GAOTD and this developer for this program. Oh, by the way, I don't think this is really worth $50]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 23:15:49 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166733</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Billy Kurch]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Bruce Tech Guy]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166732</link>
<description><![CDATA[There is no easy way to DESELECT the previous selection (Ctrl-D brings up a file folder browser to do ... what?). Please provide a Deselect. (yes you can click on the outside-of-image hashed area, if such is visible to you) 
There are no Control key shortcuts shown on menus, yet they do exist, as pressing them causes a variety of surprising things to happen (surprises in this sense is NOT good). 
Please add way to blur or feather or smooth the changed image edges.
QuickRemove seems to give better results on complex area (meaning surrounding area is complex) than Remove.
When zoomed, moving selection tool does not 'push' or cause screen to scroll, thus hard to get whole area worked on without lots of manual operate, scroll, operate, scroll, etc.
Nice way that Selection marker brush uses contrast to pick the brushed over zones for removal.
It would be nice to have a pen tool and a blur brush to touch up if a removal works almost right.  
Because otherwise, you still have to save the image and then open in another image editor to fine tune or touch up. Which of course, if it is a JPG file, every re-save further degrades the image.
Saving as JPEG has no way to specify 'quality' level. It appears to save at 90 quality. Thus your image file will get larger over time, while still slightly degrading if you re-edit, re-save.

Note that installing this will remove your reg key for GOTD PhotoStampRemover v4.2.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 22:42:27 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166732</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bruce Tech Guy]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Jayne]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166731</link>
<description><![CDATA[Doesn't install on Win7]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 21:30:18 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166731</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jayne]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: JUDE]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166730</link>
<description><![CDATA[Only tried on one photo but it worked like a charm!  Replaced a white house in the background with green trees - looks like the house was never there.  Thank you!]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 20:32:07 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166730</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[JUDE]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Denesia]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166729</link>
<description><![CDATA[Is this software only for personal use? Could someone use it to remove something in a photo that is to be used in an artwork that is to be sold later on?]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:22:36 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166729</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Denesia]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Sean S]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166728</link>
<description><![CDATA[Installed this and the software does a terrible job of removing any watermarks.  Stick with a photo editor and cloning tool. Don't waste your time on this one.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 19:14:13 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166728</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sean S]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: RoLaAus]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166727</link>
<description><![CDATA[I wouldn't say this is "flawless" as one commenter stated, but I did manage to remove a watermark from a textured background image. when I tried to remove the watermark from a picture type image, it did some weird stuff - namely took other parts of the image outside of the selection zone and placed it into the "cleaned up"/selected portion. I'll have to play around with it a bit, but one thing I noticed with the textured background was to take small chunks of the watermark out, instead of trying to select the whole thing at once. For example, the watermark in this case was the word "preview", at first I tried removing the entire word, but it created an isometric shape that replaced the word. Then I tried each individual letter and the results are about 90% satisfactory.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 18:05:54 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166727</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[RoLaAus]]></dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[By: Harry]]></title>
<link>https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166726</link>
<description><![CDATA[Poorly paid photographers should come to Cyprus! Up to €4000 to video and photograph a wedding. Includes video DVD but prints are extra but CD with watermarked pictures to choose required prints is included.]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:30:03 -0400</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-5/#comment-166726</guid>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Harry]]></dc:creator>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>