I didn't try but give this a go:

<div class="background">
   <div class="picture"><img src="somepicture.jpg" alt="somepicture" /></div>
</div>

Styling in css file:

div.background {
   background-image: url('sometransparent.gif'');
   z-index: 100;
}

You may want to play with the value of z-index. -100 May work if 100 doesn't.

Good luck

I think I tried every scenario... but in every case the transparent gif ended up behind the photo. the z-index didn't bring the transparent gif forward.

any other thoughts?

You'd need to change the html either by editing manually, changing in sql, coding a plugin or resorting to javascript

or you could use htaccess to route all image calls through a page that overlays the *watermark*

¥

Well after some major searching I was able to get some help with the code. I wrote up a little tutorial if you are looking to give your photos minimal, and I mean minimal protection. Placing a transparent GIF over your photos only prevents users from right clicking on your photos and saving them. It might be all that you need...

http://www.beatease.com/web-design.php/tutorials/protect-photos-with-a-transparent-gif

cheers
LE

I'd still go with .htaccess and adding a watermark to the actual image ;)

¥

well... in that case. LOL :-/ The transparent gif works for me since I don't want to watermark my photos and I don't want certian individuals, who I know don't know anything about compters, to save my images at all. Its a long story....

care to share .htaccess though?

I didn't want to burst any bubble, but a good screen capture utility is hard to foil. ;)

Excepting watermarks.

In simplified form :

Use .htacces to rewrite any /media/......../aaaa.gif|jpg|png to a php page that takes the original image and the watermark image of your choice, overlays the watermark on the original image ( using gd library or whatever it's called ) and then returns the watermarked image to the browser.

You could make it a tad better by caching the watermarked version of the original image and returning that for subsequent calls.

The end result is that even if they right click and "save as" or print screen, or even call the image directly, they get the watermarked version whilst your original image remains untouched.

¥

mrdav wrote:

I didn't want to burst any bubble, but a good screen capture utility is hard to foil. ;)

Excepting watermarks.

the transparet gif isn't to fully protect my photos from being saved... but I run another small blog with only select members... and trust me, these members no nothing about 'print screen', temp internet files, or viewing source... to name a few... which is why the transparent gif works.

For my public sites... yea watermark any original photos for sure... and expect that if people want your photos... they will get it.

¥åßßå... I'll have to look into the htaccess thing... sounds intersting!

A blonde makes you think! yer buggered ;)

¥

mrdav wrote:

excepting watermarks.

Of course you have the power of yer boss on your side and I'm damn sure he could remove the watermark with a flick of his eyebrow ;)

¥

Well, other than a logical contradiction, I haven't been able to figure out anything too hard for him.

I'd even be willing to bet he could save a blonde brit. ;)

As for removing watermarks, I don't think he performs parlor tricks. :P