No Credits - No Feature!

10 min read

Deviation Actions

kuschelirmel's avatar

Disclaimer: the following information is based on my understanding of copyright laws and dA Terms of Use. I am NOT voicing official dA opinion here as I am not paid CEA (Copyright and Etiquette) staff and therefore this is not my call to make! BUT I've been a photomanipulator for a few years now and as such I've come into contact with quite a few aspects of the issue and I wanted to share this as my DD guidelines concerning crediting are based on those experiences and I have to decline a LOT of DD suggestions just for missing credits.

This is why I require crediting in ALL cases

As you may know if you've read my DD guidelines, I will not feature anything where the artist's comment doesn't include credits. No matter how great it is! The only (!!!) exception may be if it is (very!) obvious from the deviant's gallery and userpage that they shoot and use their own images. But it would need to be very obvious, because a short line of "all images used are my own" will not do you any harm. It doesn't diminish your work and it doesn't hurt you to add it and neither does it take an awful lot of time and effort to add this line.

But the benefits to the community (that same community that awards DDs, mind you) if you do put it there are very valuable: the photomanips community is one that sees a lot of newcomers every day because it's an accessible art form with appealing results. Also, our stock and resources community makes it easy to get into manips even if you don't own a camera yourself. Newcomers tend to just jump into their new hobby most of the times, they don't want to read journals about what is stock and what is not just to find out about all the legal issues that are involved.

What they will most likely do though, is browse through dA and look at other art from the genre and if they see the credits there, my hope is that they will do as they see and follow the good examples set by our community. Always having some form of credit in the comment shows that giving credit is not optional. And it also helps avoid any misconceptions about the origins of your stock sources (and thus it can avoid dArama!). As soon as pictures taken by someone other than yourself are involved, dA even requires you to give credit no matter if the stock was bought under a license that relieves you of that duty (see FAQ #217: What are "Stock and Resources" and can I use them in my submissions? & FAQ #157: Can I use things created by other people in my submissions?). In that case, you do not need to link to the image itself, but rather you need to provide a link to the stock site so that anyone can check their Terms of Use and see that they do not require anything else (like a credit to the actual photographer). The same goes for by the way: they are a stock site with Terms of Use that the uploaders agree on just as the downloaders do - if someone there wants to get specific credit, they will set the image's rules differently because the site lets them do that. Then you need to link to the original picture or the photographer's user page on sxc and/or notify them of use.

I will not start to follow generic links to find out of you are violating the photographer's ToS when giving DDs or other features. It is YOUR responsibility as photomanipulators to READ the Terms of Use and follow them. Each time! There is no golden rule as to what you have to do to always be on the safe side - especially on dA there are so many different stockers who will each have their own set of rules (and they're entitled to set those rules according to what they want, not what you want!) that you will just have to get used to the idea of "read first - use later" if you want to stay in the clear at all times. It's just part of the genre you chose. But I promise it sounds harder than it is.

What it boils down to is that while each of you is responsible for your own actions, none of us live in a vacuum where our actions don't affect others. If we can set a positive example, I believe then we should do that, and give some thought as to what message others will get from how we handle crediting and copyright issues. And as DDs are such a prominent part of this site, it should now also be clear why I try to uphold such high standards when it comes to crediting/citing your sources.

:new: EDIT: miskis reminded me of the "credits coming soon"-disease that seems to be running rather high at times. If you have the time to upload your deviation, you need to make time to put in the credits! I've seen way to many "credits coming soon" dated sometime last summer to not be annoyed at the mere sight*. I get that you're eager to get reactions on your latest work, but please be fair to the stock artists that helped you create it in the first place: they put their stock out there to be used and the credit is also a way of doing some advertising for the stocker that will reach less and less people the longer you delay adding credits! As a stocker, I react pretty allergic to stuff like that and if you put yourself in the stocker's shoes you'll see that it feels like being slapped in the face, as if the deviant is trying to say "not only did I not notify you of use, but I also didn't even credit you because my time was waaaaay too precious than bothering with this lowly stuff". I hope you catch my drift here.

*this can even lead to me using the report deviation button hoping that having your dev taken down by CEA will get through to you -- I will NOT send notes or comments when I see stuff like that because I do not care for the drama that follows such exchanges, instead I let those handle it who are paid by dA to do so.

© 2011 - 2021 kuschelirmel
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
OwlInTheMirror's avatar
Well said! :clap:

It is a fantastic thing to have such great pictures provided (for free!) by our wonderful stockers. I know the stockers each have different rules, and they make them pretty clear *somewhere* on their accounts. I think it's rude and disrespectful to ignore those rules -- and honestly, how hard is it to add a line in one's description to credit them?????? Do these people *want* to look like morons? Do they *want* to have their art ignored or removed? (Well, yes, apparently some people are looking for fights, but jiminy!)

Thanks for standing up for what's right and setting a good example!

SalsolaStock's avatar
In photomanipulation everyone knows it came from somewhere, so it's odd the hesitation to reveal that in their credits. As you said, it doesn't diminish the work and as a matter of fact I hold those that properly credit in a higher regard than those that don't. Those who do not credit almost seem they are trying to hide something or feel insecure about what they've done. Maybe the fact that they relied on someone else for part of their creation causes this on some level. I think it's unfortunate. I mean, how many make their own canvas or their own paint or brushes?

Your words are admirable. The character of the DA community is created out of our actions and we should each, indeed, realize the impact our good example can make. You set a solid standard and are a great role model. Well done. :clap: ~Wee
kuschelirmel's avatar
:blowkiss: :blush: thank you for your kind words :hug: made my day!
PreetikaSharma's avatar
Couldn't agree more. :nod:
WDWParksGal's avatar
I couldn't agree with you more. I credit myself if I use my own stock. That way there isn't any confusion! In the Groups I Admin, all stock and brush resources must be credited before acceptance. It annoys me beyond belief when I come across a manipulation without one, single credit! It is just plain rude!
WDWParksGal's avatar
There are some manipers who have refused to put their sources if they got them from purchased stock or CDs. I've tried to encourage them to just add that is where the source has come from in the artist description, and boy have I been hammered for that! One maniper said it was no one's business what stock she used if she owned the images via CDs and purchased packs. I was just trying to tell her in order to avoid disappointment or controversy just add "from this CD or this pack from Renderosity" to the description, and she was adamant she was not going to. At #ManipulateThis if there are no credits then that means they cannot be entered into the challenges or the winner features! I don't understand what is so difficult to understand about a credit requirement!
kuschelirmel's avatar
if it's not their own images dA terms of use state they need to put in where they got the stock as outlined in the faq. if they refuse to, they may face removal of their work though admittedly that is unlikely because where the stock supplier doesn't want/need credit we can't take their images down for violating a right the stocker doesn't claim in the first place. BUT each group and individual here can refuse to feature their work if they refuse to add stock credits forcing them to comply IF they want to be part of the community. If they don't care about that, they can take their art elsewhere, somewhere where people do not work together but choose to only showcase what they have. It's their choice really, and I wouldn't let them draw me into an argument over that after I've explained it once. They can take it or leave it :shrug: And honestly, if someone refuses so vehemently, they surely have something to hide because why else would they refuse to name the cd/stock site?
WDWParksGal's avatar
I don't know... that does sound a bit fishy when someone refuses to list off-site credits. At #DisneyDreamers if anyone argues over a submission they are warned, and if they continue to argue all the group can do is add them to the block list!
Deadly-Wanderer's avatar
Honestly, I never trust the photomanip that got no credit in the deviation description.
kuschelirmel's avatar
too many times it's a sign of disrespect to still be naive about it :nod:
znow-white's avatar
I have an ebil plan of making a micro chip containing all Rulez &Reg's and "learn how to read quick" guide and injecting it into every user while they sleep :paranoid: Thats why I am so quiet atm :shh: :iconmuffinlaplz:.

:thumbsup: :heart:
kuschelirmel's avatar
hahaha, so there you are! plotting! :D
catlickfever's avatar
Agree 100%. People put a lot of effort into stock shoots and I definitely appreciate the fact that I'm poor and it's free. It makes me giddy with absolute joy that I can have access to gorgeous pictures for free so long as I credit. Are you kidding me? Of course I would credit! Free is rare and free and great quality makes me drool.

I really hate the whole "credits coming soon" with a passion. Not only does it strike me as rude but sometimes I'd love to know where the pictures came from because maybe I want to use it!
kuschelirmel's avatar
:heart: and yes on that last part!
tsheva's avatar

I will say that there is a piece in my gallery that I haven't provided stock on from waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back. I forgot about it and knew that those pieces, no one was going to be looking at you have reminded me!

It is highly important to credit your source. When working on something I always type in whose stock it is in PS so I don't forget and by the third copy I'm writing names down.

I have just come across a deviant's page by way of :iconautumnsgoddess: because a deviant used her image to cut and paste SPOCK's head onto one of her can see where whoever smudged her name out...I go to the deviant's page and look at her gallery and lo and behold 98% of her gallery is men having sex with SPOCK AND KIRK's heads cut and pasted onto them.

She said this is fanart.

I asked her where she got the porn from and does the photographer know she's using his pictures at all and don't even get me started on what Shatner and Nimoy would say about it...needless to say to doesn't think there's anything wrong with what she's doing and there's this whole fanart community cutting and pasting things together not very well might I add...

Le Sigh...

I reported her whole gallery.

Anyhoo, awesome journal. It needs to be a news article.
kuschelirmel's avatar
reporting is the right way to go, especially if it's that obvious :nod: arguing almost never does any good, it just serves to make us upset if they are rude and refuse to "get it". so getting their devs deleted by staff may be the only thing that could snap them out of it

tsheva's avatar
You are right. I wish I could just keep my mouth shut! writing that news article or what :D
kuschelirmel's avatar
lol keeping ones mouth shut is harder than it sounds :D believe me, I know :giggle:

and I will, soon-ish ;)
tsheva's avatar

Yes, it's a curse lol
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In