The first effective form of image protection was developed by ArtistScope in 1998. Image encryption has many advantages but is not a perfectly safe solution without protection from all methods of copying. Here are some of the techniques can be used to copy your images with their pros and cons:
Overlaying a clear image over the main image can prevent right mouse click to save the image. Only the clear image gets saved. But by saving the pages can collect all parts belonging to that page including images. Also, by viewing source an operator can locate thelink for the image to download directly.
ArtistScope was the first to develop this technique, however it was at a time when Netscape Navigator was the only web browser that could support to superimpose a transparent gif. Layers wer not supported in other web browser until much later and even then the method could be exploited by disabling javaScript.
Some photographers use Digimarc to label photographs that they distribute to agencies. The Digimarc tag invisible but serves as a means of attaching a business card to the image. It offers no copy protection. By downloading the image and saving it as a different file type the Digimarc tag is lost.
Another form of watermarking is by overlaying text or another image onto the image that is to be protected and then merging them. Most image editors can apply watermarks to images by superimposing text or transparent logos. This type of watermarking can be a deterrent for people wanting to use your image in their own projects.
Original images created as photos taken by digital cameras and mobile phones can be of extremely high quality. Computer screens are only good for 96 dpi so photos taken at 300-600 dpi awill have huge file sizes. Images for display on the web can be resized using almost any image editor to reduce their resolution (dpi) and overall dimensions which can dramatically reduce file size.
Editors like Photoshop can save images at varying quality settings. Images at 100% quality that are saved at 80-90% quality can reduce file size dramatically while not looking any different when viewed online. Compressing to 60% or less will yield a poor quality image that can look pixelated.
Using poor quality images set to the size they will be displayed at can be a deterent to those looking for high quality images.
The splicing of images involves disaplaying the image in segments. Right click saves will only obtain one segment and even if all segments are colllected, it will be a laborious chore to make them into one image.
However despite the work involved in splicing an image and displaying it in either a table or div to hold the segments in place, a simple screen shot by using the PrintScreen key will get the whole image in one piece.
Utilizing Flash to display images can prevent images saves and downloads, but a simple screenshot will get a copy of the image. Some Flash image viewers were able to disable the mouse buttons but Flash was outlawed by browser makers many years ago.
Disabling right mouse click offers nothing more than a mild inconvenience to anyone who wants to steal images. Although copy and paste actions might seem to be disabled, a user can simply save the page from the browser tool bar or click the PrintScreen button to take a screen shot.
While a image is displayed in a Java applet it can be safe from mouse saves and site grabbers. However the image can still be copied by taking a screenshot and the visitor can also view source to get the location of the image. ArtistScope's first image protection solution used encrypted images displayed in a Java applet. That solution was further developed to prevent screen capture and provide the first image protection that was safe from all exploits. But today Java is no longer supported in web browsers and mobile phones that have many limitations are now the most widely used devices.
Every component of a web page is first downloaded and saved in the temporary Internet folder known as "cache". Image grab and capture software look in cache for images. The only way to prevent retrieval of images from cache is to use encrypted images that have been domain locked or require the use of a web browser that does not cache.
Encrypted images cannot be displayed without first being decrypted, otherwise they won't be visible. Image encryption employing domain lock is the most secure solution for storing images on a web server because until they are decrypted, they are of no use even to your webmaster. For software to encrypt images with domain lock, see CopySafe Web Protection.
Trying to protect images from PrintScreen, using the button to take a screenshot of the whole screen, from a web browser, is not possible by using JavaScript as some CMS plugin makers claim. JavaScript does not have access to your clipboard and cannot action at system level. To pprevent screenshots and PrintScreen, one needs a specially designed web browser like ArtisBrowser.
All of the solutions listed below prevent all copy and prevent all of the exploits discussed here and more:
CopySafe Web Protection is the only software that provides protection from PrintScreen and screen capture. Images encrypted by CopySafe Web are domain locked and can only be displayed on the licensed web site. Plugins are available for WordPress, Moodle, Drupal and Joomla to add encrypted images to web pages and posts. However Copysafe Web requires that a Windows computer be be used. While that can be ideal for corporate networks and select clients, if you want users on all OS and devices to view these protected images, then one should instead use an ASPS solution.
The ArtistScope Site Protection System (ASPS) is the most secure copy protection solution for web content and it is viewable on all computers and devices including Windows, Mac iOS and Android phones. However to install ASPS, one needs to use a dedicated server or VPS for the rights to install at system level.
Otherwise, for web sites using shared hosting, the following solutions will enable the use of ASPS indirectly: