Installed and registered without problems on a Win 8.1 Pro 64 bit system.

The registration thanks in the name of "Sketch Drawer".

A Russian company with address&phone. We had had several software from this company.

On their webside they cannot decide to name this software "watermark remover" or "photo stamp remover"...

Upon start a resizable window opens, you can change language from finnish to farsi or kurdi.

After the first restart the software returns to unregistered, after the second registration it seems to work. The program fails in my case sometimes to remove the selected pictures, so I have to restart the program.

You add your picture and with the red marker you define, what should be deleted and replaced by the background. This works sometimes and on other pictures not, depending on the background structure of course.

I made a short test example. The pizza files - they will stay my "lorem ipsum".

Here are the before and after pictures. You see, what can be done and what fails. Does what it claims, depending on your skills&precision and the photo structure.

before : http://www1.xup.to/exec/ximg.php?fid=20628336
after : http://www1.xup.to/exec/ximg.php?fid=94159080

An easy to use software - keep it, if you don't have any of this kind.

Uninstalled via reboot - I don't need it.

Karl  –  12 years ago  –  Avez-vous trouver ce commentaire utile ? oui | non (+107)

Traduire

I have been an attorney specializing in Intellectual Property cases for 26 years, the internet is just barely reaching its 25th anniversary as we speak.

The number one misconception is by adding items such as logos, numbers and or watermarks on images constitutes a legality. It's not the least bit true. If that was the case every digital camera with time stamping enabled would copyright the images as they were shot. Then under procedures of law the owner of the camera wouldn't own 100% of the intellectual property rights to the images shot with said camera. The manufacturer of the camera would hold 51% ownership of all intellectual property rights. That would also be 51% on every image shot with the cameras they manufactured. Apple has tried to argue this point a few times in an attempt to hold iPhone owners hostage.

This is how law works, the tort "Chain Of Causation" standard is a linked series of events leading from cause to effect. Typically in the assessment of liability for damages, or in criminal cases by defense attorneys in an attempt to free their client of responsibility. Basically placing responsibility on events or individuals that Preceded the crime by steering the their client into committing it. So in everyday civil court proceedings it's rarely argued mainly because the attorney isn't experienced in tort law.

So under the law, even professional photographers, or say even tourists taking pictures, under the letter of the law technically do not have enough rights to add logos, numbers and or watermarks to pictures they took in the first place. Think of it like this, you draw a picture, okay but did you make the paper or pencil you used to draw it with? No, in that case all 3 parties involved (i.e. you, the pencil maker and the paper manufacturers) are all rights owners the drawing. That is the letter of the law.

To combat this from happening in every aspect of intellectual property rights, procedures were enacted that standardized the steps on "how to" as well as "who" can copyright images and or textual writings. If you're a photographer or a writer you should know how to do this and have the right to complain if your images are altered without your permission. As for the rest, no-one is committing any crime as 99% of all images on the internet aren't copyrighted legally anyways.

William  –  12 years ago  –  Avez-vous trouver ce commentaire utile ? oui | non (+69)

Traduire

I won't be keeping this one. It performs the same task as Inpaint, which shows up here quite often, except not nearly as well. It's fine for small areas on a large plain background, but that's about it. On most of the photos I tested, it not only did a poor job of erasing, but the selected area was replaced with a part of the picture that was nowhere in the vicinity of where I marked, making for some bizarre results. Even if it worked as well as Inpaint, the asking price of $49.99 is outrageous for a one-trick pony with a bum leg. I appreciate the offer, but I'll pass on this one.

Heather Sheffield  –  12 years ago  –  Avez-vous trouver ce commentaire utile ? oui | non (+64)

Traduire

This was given away in 19/12/2013 appears to be same version. Read reviews at
http://www.giveawayoftheday.com/photo-stamp-remover-6-1/#comments

Neil  –  12 years ago  –  Avez-vous trouver ce commentaire utile ? oui | non (+41)

Traduire

Looks like update check setting is in the registry:
Changed "disableUpdates" from "0" to "1" at:
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\softorbits\PhotoStampRemover

Avid Gamer  –  12 years ago  –  Avez-vous trouver ce commentaire utile ? oui | non (+17)

Traduire