/cgl/ - Cosplay & EGL

Don't repost others' artwork. Use a screenshot or an official artwork.

>>9785989
to be fair it IS absolutely hypocritical how the exact same people who shit themselves over uncredited art reposts in other mediums will happily dump three pieces they pulled off google images when it comes to cosplay lineups

>>9785993
how though, they’re not claiming the art is theirs, they’re not making money off of it, but to show what they’re planning to cosplay
most people use official art anyways, i find it good reason fanart if you cant find an outfit or something because what i write above

>>9785989
>Hey don't steal my art that I stole off the original creator of said character


Fucking fan artists are god damn hypocrites.

>>9785996
you're still using the work of others for your own gain without providing the original artist with anything. it takes like 30 seconds to caption something with 'art by blahblah' so people can actually find them if they think the art is neat

>>9786024
As long as they credit the series/series creator for the character design, they aren't stealing by drawing original artwork of the character.

To be fair Pokemon cosplayers are pretty horrible for this; like it's one thing using a fanart ref instead of a near identical official shot in a lineup collage for like cgl or some shit, but entirely another when blatantly cosplaying someone else's gijinka/costume design without credit

>>9786025
Sign your art, problem solved

why do so many artists have such a victim complex? I have an artist friend who is always complaining that people still her art but they don't, she is a nobody.

>>9786031
You know that most Twitter and Tumblr artists don't properly cite their fan art. They leave it up to the people to assume it's fan art same as the cosplayers who know people will assume they didn't actually draw the pictures

>>9786139
i DO sign my art. never had a single problem with art theft

>>9785989
Art theft =/= posting without credit

It's theft even if you credit if you don't have the artists permission. You are not absolved from stealing just because you "credited" the artist.

I hate how entitled our generation is with regard to other people's intellectual property. You do not have the right to use something just because you found it on the internet.

Every time I've had something stolen and approached the person asking them to remove it, I've been met with a barrage of nasty vagueposting about me and whining about how everyone else does it so it's fine. I asked you nicely to remove it because tumblr has a three strike rule, and your blog would have been deleted and you banned had I DMCA claimed for all of the pictures you stole. I don't ask nicely anymore, I just report it and hope they're banned.

>>9786139
yeah because people don't crop their lineups lmfao

>>9786292
As much as I could go on a proper rant about this mindset, there's something fundamentally flawed about your outlook on the entire phenomena.
Theft and stealing things as concepts do not and cannot be used in conjunction with digital information.
Theft is removing something from someone elses possession, not even remotely what is going on when people repost artwork. You're not out of anything physically if someone does this, it's purely a shallow issue of moral standing if this is right or wrong, not that you loose out on not having something, because you still have it wherever it was. To which the answer is "It's your own fault for posting it online in the first place".
The piracy (the closest we've come to a colloquial term for the actual issue, even with its deliberate misconstrusion by certain groups of people) "debate" about this is more applicable to when there's money involved and people are paying for literally nothing tangible, but for art reposing, there's even less of a reasonable argument to be had.
You willingly posted whatever it was you posted wherever it was you posted it at for the purpose of other people to see. By doing this, by the nature of how data works, every time someone views the posted artwork there's a local copy sitting in memory for however long the viewer keeps it there for. At the end of the day, it's just a image of some sort in local memory. Whether someone decides to duplicate it again elsewhere locally is something literally no one can stop, again, by the very nature of how digital data works. If they later upload it elsewhere, well, if you didn't want that to happen, then you shouldn't of posted it in the first place, your allowing anyone and literally everyone who views the artwork to have it in local storage somewhere to possibly be uploaded elsewhere.
1/2

>>9788406
2/2
If your issue was purely a issue of other people claiming that it was their artwork, then there's a valid issue to be had, It's pretty shitty to have someone come along and claim your hard work as theirs. A issue that can be resolved with a link to the original artwork wherever the repost is with a date making it obvious that yours was the origin, which is a convenient feature of just about everywhere images are posted. Or a sig of some sort, a option others have already pointed out, works wonders as well. Yes, there will always be people who will edit them out, but they are by far fewer people who do this due to the extra effort involved than just repost it 1:1 as it originally was posted. And if google reverse image search finds it, it'll find it even with a removed sig.
I would think as a collective culture we should frankly be thankful that the amount that art that gets reposted with people going out of their way to make sure they credit where credit is due far outweighs the people who go out of their way to claim others artwork as their own given the relative ease of doing either over the other.
As much as certain individuals might not like it, when it comes to the internet, as much as "If it exists, there's porn of it" holds true, "If it exists, it can be found and duplicated" also holds true, and it's not even because people go out of their way to do so.

>>9788409
>It's pretty shitty to have someone come along and claim your hard work as theirs. A issue that can be resolved with a link to the original artwork wherever the repost is with a date making it obvious that yours was the origin, which is a convenient feature of just about everywhere images are posted. Or a sig of some sort, a option others have already pointed out, works wonders as well

You would be shocked how many con AAs get this information but still don't do anything to get the vendor to leave.

I think its asinine to yell about art theft or lack of credit unless its an artist interpretation of something like a gijinka or a Nightvale character where they are deviating from an official or nonexistent design.

>>9788413
The statement was meant for art online, With people making money off of prints of other peoples artwork that gets dodgy fast. To the point I would of though there's genuine legitimate grounds to be had for the artist.

>>9786292
If you think this is a generational thing, you're delusional. People have been using, stealing, and copying other people's art for ever, and most older people are fucking clueless compared to the average twenty something when it comes to art or intellectual theft.

>>9786292
>DMCA claiming a random 16 year old cosplayer who used your artwork for a random twitter or instagram lineup post
god damn I bet you live a sad lonely life

>>9786031
No its still theft. You cant see someine elses picture, draw it, and claim its original. It doesnt matter how many tweaks you make. Its lazy and stealing. You can write an original story for it but the drawing can never be original.

>>9788742
That's the thing, they aren't. There's more to most anything than a black and white "This is mine/original and this is not mine/original".
A piece of fan art can be both original (by the literal image existing unrelated to anything anyone else had made) and not original (the subject matter of the image based off of something else that had already existed before the images creation).
>>9788406
For why "theft" is still not applicable to this situation.
Also,
>You can create a series of markings that in total make up words in a particular language that pertain to something that the creator of those markings didn't create, but you can't make a series of markings that in total make up a image based on something that the creator of those markings didn't create.

>>9788413
this thread is about cosplayers using official or fan art to show their cosplay lineups on social media.
idk if these whiny cunts expect cosplayers to draw their own 100 original fanart or what but it's not gonna happen

>>9788444
Best they learn it at 16 when they can still use age as an excuse, rather than when they're an adult. Being young doesn't excuse shit. Neither does the "everyone does it and doesn't get in trouble" excuse I see get thrown around. Just use the source material for your lineup pics.

>>9788954
I guess you actively despise and are vehemently against the concept of fair use then, aren't you?

>>9788444
I wonder what's precondition of such mentality?
Some artists act chill seeing their art used elsewhere, but some really lose their shit over. What's the reason for that? Lack of appreciation?

>>9788413
Things that pay money to the con: people with tables
Things that don't pay money: kicking out artists

Unless it's a large IP holder asking for it it's better to just let it slide for a con

>>9788962
>>9788969
Some artists really ask that their art not be reposted. Some are okay if you ask first. Some don't care. If you just go ahead and do it without getting permissions or against the artist's word, you just have to accept the consequences.
I don't think just straight up reposting work falls under fair use. I'm not against the concept of fair use.

>>9789162
yeah but you're talking about taking legal action against minors for simply posting a picture online. They aren't selling anything, they aren't profiting off it, they aren't claiming it as their own. In a way, they are infringing n copyright less than the fan artists themselves who profit off of someone else's characters and ideas.

>>9789162
>Artists asking not to repost art
>Thinking that matters at all, especially here
As well as the futility of wanting people not to repost it (>>9788406), there's also another point that if people didn't repost art, art can and does get lost forever, either on purpose by the original artist or because accounts get banned / lost to time and places that could be backing it up "respecting the artists wishes".
The "consequences" are entirely irrelevant in the face of what can and does happen. If stuff's reposted it's reposted. Nothing short of intentionally sabotaging the artwork to the point that it's ruined can stop the spread of digital images, or complete apathy.

I don't really understand why this is so hard for everyone. If an artist has a "please don't repost without permission", then just ask permission if you really need to repost the picture for whatever reason. If you for some unimaginable reason are unable to ask for permission, then at least put a link crediting the artist for the work and be prepared to remove the post/picture if the artist asks you to. It's basic human decency.
As for signatures in art, pretty much everyone I know does sign their drawings. But it's usually a small text somewhere that can unfortunately easily be cropped, or edited out. Plasting a huge watermark over everything that you're not selling a physical copy of will just make people annoyed and you not popular. So again, not really the artists fault when someone's a cunt and gets rid of their signature. While I do agree with one of the anons above about the fact that when you are posting something online, you are kind of supposed to expect that people will get their hands on it and there's no telling what they'll do with it. I'd still like to think that there's no need to accept art theft / reposting without permission/credit, even if it might be unavoidable. Trying to excuse it or say it can't be helped just makes it easier for people to do and not feel quilty about it, which is a problem for those who're trying to make an income a name for themselves with art.

And last, why not just use official art for cosplay etc. lineups? I'm pretty sure that if you've made an entire outfit of it, you will have reference pictures saved up that hopefully aren't fanart. Just use those for your lineups. As for cosplaying fan designs, just ask permission first and remember to give credit if you do get permission. If not, just move on with life and cosplay something else. However I've only seen positive responses to someone politely asking if they may cosplay a design, as opposed to just running with it.

>>9789176
>Thinking that reposting pictures on an anonymous image board is comparable to the situation at hand
When you repost someone else's work on your own personal account without credit, there will be people who'll just assume you drew it, even if there's a signature. Heck, even with credit some people just don't care enough to notice, but might still like or retweet/blog the picture so instead of the original artist, you'll be the one who gets the traffic and fame. So instead of reposting something, why not just retweet/blog the original from the artists account? It even requires less time than it would saving the picture to your computer and posting it again on your own account.

>>9789709
If the person re-whatever do their due diligence and post source along with the art in question, and people can't be bothered to look into it when it's right there, that's not the person re-whatever-ings fault.
I'd far prefer if everyone had direct links to source over reuploading in every case, but by nature of the internet that can sometimes be either impractical or straight up impossible. In fact, whenever I go looking for art, it's extremely rare that I ever not see source, either tangentially or more commonly by the re-whatever having source there.
My points have been directed at the mindset that no one should use "my stuff" ever, not people intentionally spreading things with proper credit in tow.
There's a reason that asking for source is such a ingrained meme on every board of 4chan.

>>9789707
>Asking people for permission on the internet
>Asking people for anything on the internet
>Especially when some people feel as entitled either way to it as some people are
You're making a massive jump in assumption that this is even remotely viable behavior in the face of pic related. The amount of time that it takes to get correspondence going (with or without having to track people down first) with the possibility that they'll say no can't beat, well, again, pic related. It's basic human decency to not claim others work as your own, it's a bit of a stretch to think this also includes asking permission to not claim work as your own, unless it's for profit.
With everything said, it is a bit odd to use fan art in place for reference to official characters. Unless there's details in the cosplay straight lifted from the fan art over the source character, using fan work can't ever beat official promotional material, unless the official stuff doesn't exist in any meaningful way (ie, early 2000s resolutions and compression).

>>9789749
> tfw I bother to ask permission to repost
> forget to track down the convo
> forget the actual thing I wanted to repost
> too much effort, not asking anymore

There was a few of things I still don't know if I could repost. Sorry not sorry.

>>9789707
You never need to ask for permission to cosplay, that's ridiculous. People are destroying fanculture by their insane adherence to copyright law. Just use common sense, and when you make a piece of fanart, the community has all right to use the ideas you added in the fanart without crediting you.

Would you be okay with someone taking your cosplay photos and reposting them without crediting/linking back to you?

Eh, as an artist myself, I don't see the issue with using fanart in lineups since you're not really posting the art, you're just saying "I'll be wearing something like this!"
Admittedly, it's really weird to not use official art for most cases, but you gotta be an absolute dumbass to think someone drew the shit in their cosplay lineup.
It's not the same as your usual art repost (ie. posting the full picture by itself). It's all about context.

>>9786200
You don't gotta be a somebody to get your art stolen. I had my shitty MS Paint Sonic fanart stolen when I was 12.

>>9786200
If it's "idea theft," it's OC DONUT STEEL complex and she needs to get over herself. But if people are taking her art and saying it's theirs, she's in the right.


Also, everyone who's promoting reposting art without credit/without asking first in this thread is the reason why so many talented artists, especially eastern ones, stop posting online. Apparently some Japanese artists aren't allowed to draw fan art while working for certain companies, so if their art gets publicized through means they can't control they'll just stop posting. lmo It's not a big deal if it's on Facebook or somewhere private, but I've seen reposted art (which isn't even credited most of the time) get much more attention on tumblr or twitter and it absolutely sucks for the original artist.

It's also different from posting images on image boards like 4chan. On here, nobody will get attention or profit off of somebody else's work.

>>9789164
>>9788962
>>9788444
Nothing happens to the person who reposted the picture. They either take it down or the post gets deleted. That's literally it. On tumblr they get three strikes, unsure about twitter. If they don't learn their lesson it's their own fault.

>>9795497
Actually, yes, I would. The more chances that someone sees my cosplay, recognizes the very obscure fandom, and maybe rewatches the series, the better.

>>9795497
Are they making money off it or claiming it as their own in written form? Then no. Otherwise sure.

>>9795497
That's different since a cosplay has your real face attached to it which opens you up to things like deep fakes and other nasty shit that artwork doesn't

>>9795514
>Admittedly, it's really weird to not use official art for most cases

I agree but sometimes stock art is bad or not high res, or kind of boring. I usually use official art unless it doesn't match the visuals of the rest of my lineup, then I'll find fanart that does. Say for example 2 of my cosplays have pink themes and the other is black. I'll try to find fanart that has some pink in it.

>>9795526
If they're not supposed make fan art to begin with how is it others' fault? It's not like the fan art by the artist posted itself

>>9789176
The point isn't about whether you listen to them or not. The point is, if they do not wish to have their work reposted, and it is, they are within their rights to DMCA/report it, whatever.
People are going to repost it if they want no matter what. Just don't bitch and moan if the original artists get your post deleted.

>>9798396
That comes back to the original part though
>Dmca-ing random 16 year olds' cosplay posts off the internet
That's just laughably petty

>>9798374
It's more of a case that people repost it then get upset when the original artist deletes everything.

As an artist I'll say it's like this. When people ask you to do work, but for "exposure". It's bullshit, but you WILL be working. You will be posting to the internet and trying to gain an audience. Instead of trying to DCMA everything it's much better to watermark the hell out of everything and actually gain enough exposure so that people will recognize your work. Your other choice is just to not post anything to the internet, like other person mentioned above. That's fine especially if you are salaried and have a company backing you. If you are an independent artist then watermark your shit. You're not going to be able to stop imageboards from existing or girls from using your art for their Gaia online roleplays.

>>9798399
You can think whatever you want about it. If someone wants to DMCA a repost, they can. That's their right.
People do petty shit all the time.

>>9798425
If trying to get exposure is absolutely the only goal, then that's all fine and dandy. But as someone who's spent many a hour looking for artists both for the purpose of finding source and/or for seeing if I'd want to commission them at some point, my first thought any time I see someone "watermark the hell out of everything", it comes off as them being massively insecure about their artwork, and that the person feels as though no one should be allowed to enjoy the artwork itself, just that I know who made it above all else. Which doesn't even work if it's illegible, or a three letter abbreviation, or some special symbol that only makes sense if I know the artist anyway. Not the kind of person I want to give the time of day (or money) to.
Absolute perfection, as far as I'm concerned, is a legible distinct name as a signature in a corner of the artwork, or a literal URL to the blog/twitter/whatever it was originally posted to.
If someone doesn't care where a image came from, they're not going to look for it or care who made it, and someone who does will. But both will be annoyed to some degree if the image has either text or markings smeared all over it.

I make cosplay lineup collages for most cons and I always go out of my way to use official art, even if it means some serious google-fu to find a fitting picture.

I’ll agree that reposting isn’t ‘theft’ (unless they repost and claim they drew it- that’s another matter), but reposting with no source DOES hinder an artist’s reach which can affect their income, for those that sell their work. It’s perfectly understandable that artists get upset about uncredited reposts/use without permission (for those that specify) because it’s essentially a big ‘Fuck You’.
It can affect the prospect of potential customers- if the artists original post only gets, say, 250 retweets or whatever, but an unsourced repost of it gets 10000+ it means that the majority of those 10000 aren’t going to see the original artist and follow them and help promote their business. Also, it’s just polite to source. It takes like 10 seconds to credit.

Artists neex to stop complaining that people like their stuff.

I know a gal that is a decent artist. She actually goes around makeing sure nobody post her work. I really liked one of her works. I asked to purchase it. She would not sell. J asked for a print. She had none. I told her to letme know when she gets some. Figured it would be a week or two and she lives down the street so ill get one soon. Montjs go by and she doesn't have prints oc any oc her works. She eventually see that i have the pic as my phone background . she flips her shit and accuses me od stealing.

Now years later she complains all day on socal media that bobody buys any of her prints. She still does not have the one I wanted.

It was her best peice by far too. Not even anime related or anything.

>>9785989
This is fucking stupid.

on the subject of art theft, this recently went around twitter regarding a popular cosplayer. Where do you all stand on each of these accusations?

>>9803229
At least try to post a legible picture.

>>9798439
>It's their right so it's justified

Yeah it's probably beneficial to artists to watermark their stuff but let's be real. There's a ton of people with followings in the millions who bend over backwards to obscure the source. I've seen so many tumblr blogs download and repost drawings without source even though reblogging from the source would have been easier.

Even worse is those Facebook videos with 3 million views where they rip someone else's video, blur or crop out the logo/watermark, and stick WHO MADE THIS XD XD XD on it as if they didn't download it directly from the source.

>>9803267
Is... is that just a normal petticoat that shouldn't be worn by itself on the outside in the first pic of her?

>>9803267
She clearly cosplayed those character but it's weird she liked about it and said they were OC. I consider this to be different since she out right said it was OC and not what people in here are talking about, which is not saying anything