Thanks for all the Fish... And...

2 min read

Deviation Actions

Just a note...

I am very grateful to any artist with the kindness and consideration to share that person's creativity.  It takes courage, gives someone a real chance to hurt you with a cruel internet comment, and you risk your most precious dreams and visions being trampled or mocked by thoughtless people.

I am very grateful.  I try to make some small return with praise, support, and USEFUL NEVER CRUEL comments.  If you can't say something nice... But I also know, very well, the ache and emptiness that comes from no feedback on something you had the courage to share...

AND... (not a 'but.'  Please don't ignore everything before the 'but!')

When you put a large, obscuring watermark through your art, you are obviously more concerned about someone stealing your work than seeing your work.  As I see it, it rather negates the whole thing involved with putting it up at all.  I want to see the picture, not a distracting graphic--and not all watermarks ARE distracting graphics!  If you make that impossible, it's your choice, but know this from me:

I will not comment upon or award a 'favorite' to any picture, no matter how good, or how in need of friendly suggestions, that has such a large and distracting watermark upon it.  By all means, do whatever you wish or think best with your creativity--but when I can't appreciate it, I won't support it.  I hate to say this in addition, but it's a simple flat truth--most of the stuff I see protected by a large, distracting watermark didn't have snowball's chance in Hades of being copied or stolen.

To those of you who so unselfishly share--thank you, so very much.

© 2012 - 2021 MensjeDeZeemeermin
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
stillarebel's avatar
I agree with you on watermarks. If I was that concerned with theft I wouldn't put my art on the internet. I don't watermark my art that I post here and I don't restrict any stock that I post. I think that is stupid also. If you are posting stock for artists to use you shouldn't restrict "THEIR" work. Once you give stock for use then the artwork belongs to the artist. Any stock you see of mine is free to use however and wherever you choose.If you can provide a link and show me the art,then I appreciate it, but that isn't even required
benitezdk's avatar
... To have art lifted! ... An accolade! ... :thumbsup:
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
Anyone who passes off another's work as that person's own deserves worse than ridicule--but, if caught, the ridicule is easy to supply.
mplumb's avatar
So true Wendy so true.  I post pics for people to enjoy and I think it ruins a pic to stamp a watermark across the main part. But that`s just me.
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
I just feel you should let people see the art if you're going to post it at all.  Thank you for your support.
DavidKrigbaum's avatar
I agree with you on the watermark, I understand why people do it, but makes it hard to appreciate the work.

Then again I haven't drawn anything worth stealing for 14 years and running! Yay me! And photos can be hard to prove it's stolen art unless its of a particular moment in time like during a performance.
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
You are a superb photographer.
914four's avatar
Bravo! :clap: Well said!
Edit: Wait, I just realized that this was already in my faves. I must be getting old. Or perhaps it's the lack of sleep of late...
Siobhan68's avatar
Those obstrusive Watermarks are REALLY annoying! I agree to a point.
But I think it is possible to watermark a picture without completely ruining it. I try to make very unobstrusive ones and it saved me once, when my art was stolen and loaded up on a porn site O__o
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
I quite agree.  My rule applies if the watermark is the first thing I see.
Siobhan68's avatar
That is soooo annoying! Some of my first works have such watermarks for I did not know back then how to do it better.
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
And if an artist values the watermark that much, good enough.  That artist and I part company.  Ideally, one could always upload it again with a different setting.
Dorothy-T-Rose's avatar
Great thoughts and, on the whole, I basically agree with you.  I used to be one of those who used large watermarks, though I tried to keep it faint and unobtrusive.  I absolutely refuse to remove the small watermark, for a couple of reasons:  Locking your front door won't keep a determined thief out, but it will keep honest people and lazy thieves out; I use my watermark to credit people (especially in the case of fanart) and to post how I'd prefer people to contact me (my e-mail).  This has actually worked out wonderfully for me, especially when my images have been reposted on Facebook without my knowledge or any credit or link back to the original and, lo and behold, I got an e-mail from a new fan!

Incidentally, I'm in the process of reposting my older works sans faint, unobtrusive large watermark and am keeping only the smaller informative one.

MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
I do not dictate, I only observe--if to my mind the watermark interferes with my appreciation of the art, then I slam down the door.  If it doesn't--and many of them don't--I rejoice and comment and thank.

I look forward to seeing your re-marked gifts of beauty to the world.
amberchrome's avatar
I don't really worry about "art thieves". The nice thing about having an idiosyncratic style and choice of subject matter is that it sticks out like a sore thumb even if traced. And unless you're doing paid work for clients and don't want them ripping off your samples and proofs and giving you nothing in return, the watermark is generally uneeded. 
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
Your style is as unmistakable, moreover, as it is superb.  Putting things up on Deviant FIRST also makes your case for you.
dashinvaine's avatar
Hi Wendy

Thanks for your comments and appreciation, and I'm glad you liked the latest fish. I share your opinion on watermarks, by the way, they are either so prominent that they ruin the image for everyone, or they are not prominent, which means a determined art-thief could easily photoshop them out. I will seldom fav anything with a watermark. (Not that I see faving as doing an artist a favour, since the faver gets as much if not more out of it than the favee, but still it is quite nice to get favs!) It's a shame people also need to be reminded that just because an image appears online without a watermark it doesn't mean it can be used elsewhere without permission. It's not like we artists bite (hard) or as if and can't be noted or emailed and asked for permission. My normal policy is to grant permission for use of existing works in a non-profit capacity, as long as credit is given, and as long as the image is not licensed to someone else or was not a commission. (If this is the case I will normally state it in the description). For for-profit uses of existing pieces, I am normally happy to negotiate a licencing fee, which won't break anyone's bank.

Anyway, all the best

MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
Your work is a lovely gift to those of us who appreciate it, your skill marked and powerful, and your thoughts as clear as the fine details in your costumes.  Thank you for your kind words and visit, I haven't nearly the graphic treasures to share with you that you have so generously shared with us, your watchers.
peterpulp's avatar
My view is that  these people who so mutilate their work by grafting huge watermarks on it for fear that it will be"stolen"really shouldn't be posting in the first place.The internet isn't  a merchandise mart or at least it shouldn't be for those who identify themselves as artists....Of course when I made this observation on my own page some time ago I was swamped with a blizzard of nasty responses from the same people who put these awful watermarks on their work,so much so that I removed the comment and thread...
dashinvaine's avatar
Are you against artists getting to eat and pay rent? The internet absolutely is a merchandise mart for artists who endeavour to make a living out of it. If you like something you should also be prepared to pay for it.
peterpulp's avatar
Oh the poor" starving" artists...My heart just bleeds for them..I like nature and I photograph it,for FREE..In your world I'd be charged because,gee,that tree HAS to belong to somebody...
I repeat what I have already said,if you are so damned afraid that I or anyone else will"steal"your image you shouldn't put up on the internet...certainly not here where most folks frown on pasting big ugly watermarks over art ..I trust that this answers all of your questions,and thus allows you to go back to counting your shekels without having to ask me these same stupid questions a second time....
MensjeDeZeemeermin's avatar
My next crusade-- Cell Phone Camera scans.
uglygosling's avatar
Occasionally I will see something that I would have added to my collection of favorites, were it not for the often huge and very distracting watermark dominating the picture! Rarely will I favor something with any watermark at all, even though some Deviants have had problems with others stealing their artwork...
Aerodil's avatar
This is sweet. I'm not the best artist and so posting my art has been a risk... even posting my characters is a risk. However, I am trying to showcase my writing skills in hopes to attract a publisher because I am not that great at finding them. I've been thinking of self-publishing, but I do not have the money or the materials to do it :shrug:
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In