Who is in the right here, the commissioner or the artist?
Commissioner is right. Though if this was like a $20 commission or something then both are wrong
Idk, does the artist make it upfront that the art they sell has their watermark on it? If so then commissioner can't read and is in the wrong. If they don't, they need to realize they're being paid to create a product and if the client requests you remove your watermark, it's been paid for, and you didn't say upfront this is a no go, then you as the artist are in the wrong
>>7953184keep your gay twitter drama on twitter faggot
i have no idea what the fuck is going on there and i'm glad to be oblivious
You killed a thread for this xitter dramaslop bs, shame on you anon.
>>7953184That's just a chibi lmfao commission just provide an alternative with no watermark
>>7953184commissioner obviously, don't put ugly water marks on work you have paid for retards...
The commissioner subtly gives away the plot by mentioning how you have to squint to see the watermark. It's not about the watermark being intrusive and taking away from the work, it's about his autistic need to control every minute facet of his character's image online. It's immature and if he ever stumbles into success in this gay vtuber sphere behavior like this will serve as kindle for other autists to burn him with. >>7953187On the artist's vgen page this kind of icon drawing sells for $8 currently.
>>7953275It doesn't matter it's a paid work if your client doesn't want anything to be there you send it without it and shut up about it.
its not a watermark its a signature.
>>7953282Customer is your god sharty if you are not happy with that they will go and use AI.
>>7953184The commis->nvm the artist
>>7953278You're not wrong, but you're ignoring the outsized reaction of the commissioner. A 3 star (or lower) anonymous review and proper crediting would've gotten the same point across without looking petty and volatile. If you want to be a somebody online, especially a somebody who rolls in these histrionic social media vtuber spheres, you ought to remain a consummate professional in the places where it matters. You can't afford to become persona non grata to the artists who breathe life into your OC. This lack of discretion has doomed countless people online. It's never worth it.
>>7953291Ohh haha I used to have this kind of autistic commissioner in the past. Redlinerfags are not for everyone. I stopped getting this kind of clients from now on and it's so much less stressful.
>>7953184In the end artists are going to lose which is good i draw too but i wish every day for absolute and utter destruction of this faggots. You can't even do what your customer is asking you to do so why should you exist ? AI will literally win which is good if you act this way. You are getting money so you shut the fuck up and do what is asked from you if you can't they go and do deal with somebody else. Fucking stupid commies.
>>7953293Bro i commissioned people in eastern Europe and when it said i don't like something about their work they fixed it and send it back that day 0 bitching. Western artists are constantly complaining it's like dealing with kids... oh no you can't do that, you can't this and you can't that here is my TOS and here are. What the fuck ?
>>7953298>Eastern Europoor
>>7953301Yeah still then you can't cry if you start losing your customers because you do this stupid shit. You either work what you got paid for you don't.
>>7953298Like I said, my contention isn't with your point that the artist is wrong for not obliging over something so insignificant as an $8 icon portrait, it's over the commissioner's autistic and self destructive behavior. There's no clear right or wrong person in this scenario but if this were to somehow blow up online only one party would be harmed as a result of their behavior. It may not be fair but that's a part of the business.
Artist is right, not because he's right but anyone who's too much of a retard to open MS paint and remove a signature on a flat color is such an immense retard he loses any argument.
>>7953184I was going to say the artist was in the right, because their service is apparently very cheap ($8 according to another anon in this thread)... until I read that none of the artist's examples had the watermark. If the examples all had watermarks, then the commissioner knew what they were getting, but since they didn't, the commissioner didn't.That said, the commissioner is acting unprofessional here too. So both are in the wrong, but the commissioner slightly less so.
>watermarkI hate zoomers so fucking much, how are they so fucking retarded
>>7953320>watermark + watermark filter + ai filter
>>7953184Vtrannies are fucking cancer. Never get involved with them. Don't stoop so low and always cancel them if they try to get whiny with you. Scum of the earth imho
Hold the phone, I was just looking up the people in OP's image to see what was actually being said. Firstly, the fucking commission was apparently only $3!?... Yeah, for $3, they get to watermark their work.Secondly, the person in picrel is saying that the the little signature the red arrow is pointing at in OP's image IS the watermark! THAT'S THE ACTUAL THING THEY'RE COMPLAINING ABOUT!?Yeah, if this is true, the artist is totally in the clear, and the client is a cunt.
>>7953184>ahh my perfect 5 star count!So they really only care about 5 stars or nothing? They should learn how rating things work and expect that the internet will criticize the most random things
These commissions are like trophy collectibles to OC owners. You probably know a bunch of OCs simply because the owner keeps hiring artists to draw them.Many commissioners collect artwork from different artists to showcase and promote their OCs. Adding a signature makes it look like the artist is claiming ownership of the OC.They won't edit the image because that doesn't change the original source. Reposting is seen as rude as those commissions are not commercial-use. The artist still owns the drawing.
>>7953447$3 is not worth it. I’m not even talking about the actual drawing, but handling of a client—the back and forth, trying to settle on a design, all of it—that alone is too much of a hassle for $3.
>>7953275the commissioner says that because they normally credit the artists and link their pages, but since the artist insisted on keep the watermark they're being petty and telling them they can go fuck themselves and people can squint to see their handle
>>7953463People charging $3 for commissions are thirdies or juveniles that can afford to charge such abysmal rates.
>>7953461so the whole thing is>predators complaining about defensive measures taken against predatory practices
>>7953312yeah imo the move would have been to open it in paint, paint over it, then link their artist handle first thing, so if the artist had a problem with it, it'd be clear who the one with the petty behavior was in this case.
>>7953467I don't think it's worth it even for thirdiesprobably just dumb kids with too much free time
>>7953468>wins a trophy>trophy creator etched his name into it
>>7953467or people who trace ai sloppa
>>7953472Yeah I wouldn’t want to have “cum slurping world championships” written on my penis shaped first place trophy either
Seems like the vtumor also got a discount unless the artist recently changed the prices
>>7953489Those rates are so low.
>>7953472>Enter Competition and win>Competition's name is on the Trophywtf!?
>>7953489...I just can't prove it...
guys what if this is all an elaborately orchestrated marketing ploy? Outrage and sympathy are what sells on the modern internet desu
>>7953184If a sinlge 3 star review on a small commision potenitally ruins her life then she has bigger issues
kek this is why you grind until you're worth at least 100usd per piece
>>7953184omg i already hate watermark fags but this is even worse. take that ugly shit off if someones paying you. fucking hell
>>7953447I have heard a few times to beware of cheap clients, looks it checks out once again.
