Certainly understandable from your side. I think I would find it flattering they copied since it was such a good piece. I would imagine someone wanted one in the same pose. I like yours more though, it has a bit better expression and depth :)

You'll find loss of art like this on FA and the likes. It could be pure coincidence. Like we can see some subtle changes, which should be enough to set it from your work. I've used a few images for rough pose examples for artists, it's up to these skilled artists to make the best choices. :)

Yeah, that's not tracing , but my art was copied too much. Like ,poses, gestures, close-ups, background, lighting, palette. For me it looks as the same art in a different style and with different characters.

>the other artist has clear changes
Like what ? The artist has already contacted me and confirmed the fact that he relied too heavily on my work ( We decided that it was not necessary to remove their art, but it was necessary to add credit to me) , but I'm too interested in what you meant

Dunno, they look similar, but with a pose like this there are probably a hundred other artpieces out there.
The Artstyle of the artist looks similar to yours, which makes it like a hard copy.
I wouldn’t loose my mind over this. Try to look at the positive side: someone was taking your picture as reference. Isn’t that bad as long as it isn’t traced 1:1.

Yea, that's pretty much what I thought.

The bad thing is that they took money for it. An isolated case is unpleasant, but it could be an accident, BUT if the artist continues to do this in the future, then I don’t want other artists who draw original content to suffer because I remained silent and no one caught it at the very beginning

Yep, definitely have an eye out for that. If this really becomes obvious plagiarism something should be done, for the original artists sake

I imagine it was the request of the commissioner to copy the pose/background. Doesn't look like they do YCH's, but never seen them before.

I understand what it feels like to be copied, for someone to benefit from your original hard work. It really sucks. Feels like you're being cheated.

In this circumstance, I feel you should be credited, with a link to your original piece, since it's clearly based on your work and is not entirely their own. It is clearly traced. (for non-artists; it is easy to "trace" a piece but do so in your own style; in fact I'd say it's easier than outright tracing).

This comes off more like the client sending your art as a reference. I've seen plenty of clients get tunnel vision and they essentially want a redux of the reference but with their characters. I honestly run into that problem myself every now and again when commissioning an artist. Now this could also be a case of the artist taking reference and the just assuming that's exactly what the client wants. A case of taking the reference too literally.

Definitely inspired, near certainty that yours was used as reference.

I also noted that while some parts of the pose were changed just enough that I can't call it a one-to-one trace, his right hand is in the same exact pose, and their legs are close enough that I feel confident calling that the exact same pose as well.

The artist is claiming this piece is a commission, the only way I could see it being understandable is if the commissioner sent them the picture as a reference after editing it to remove your signature. Otherwise, it doesn't look good to make a piece that was clearly inspired by yours without giving any sort of attribution.

It might seem extreme, but I might need to treat them under plagiarism rules: Even if some of their work is wholly original, given the more than coincidental similarities with your piece without a statement of proper credit, I can't just implicitly trust that any of their other work is original; I have to wonder if they copied others before and it's just that nobody has found the source yet.

The same rule I have in place for Internet Historian after his Man In Cave video, unfortunately.

Update as of 3:17PM CST: When my comment was made, the artwork in question did not attribute credit to TGT1512, and simply stated that the work was a commission and had a link to the artist's Telegram. As of this update, it now shows credit and states that TGT1512 had the original idea.

This was written because we contacted personally and resolved the issue

I've had some commissions before where I send a suggested pose reference like " make it something like this" but I don't mean an almost exact or copy of the pose in those cases so I will add that a different angle of it is fine too. Also I will usually at least have the pose in a different setting to make it different from the pose reference. Maybe it is just artists playing it safe and drawing a pose almost exactly the same to avoid drama with customers, or it's the commissioner who wants it exactly like that when maybe they can't afford to commission you for somethign similiar.

Unfortunately there are only so many ways to draw poses and characters, but I can understand how this can feel like theft or plagiarism to an artist. I've had to drop character ideas myself because somebody else already made a character close to what I had in mind already, and either rework the character or just abandon it entirely in some cases. =/

Anyways, I doubt this had any nefarious intent behind it. It's not traced exactly and they did credit the original to you at least.

Oooh, that is new. That credit was not there this morning.

I've looked into this a bit and it's curious, the images in that gallery are marked as having been commissions but there never seems to be a link to whoever commissioned the pieces, not even any names mentioned. In fact it seems the only link I saw when skimming through the gallery leads here to TGT...

I may have to retract my previous statement about there not being anything nefarious going on, things seem a bit sus afterall.

Yeah, that's blatant theft, even down to the background. I'd contact the artists and see what can be done.

We this this already. This the reason why the credits under NervousCherry's art was added

Lighting and the background is a bit too much imo, but even if it was certainly heavily inspired from your art, it wasn't traced, and you can't claim ownership of a certain way two characters are posed fucking. So in my opinion no harm was really done there. And considering they did give full credit, even if they probably didn't really need to.

The credits was added only after my journal and after the artist confirmed in notes the fact that my art was used as a basis for they art

Oh that is aggravating, I agree then, this is not ok.

"Credits to the artist for original idea"

....Yeah....no. It's a bad copy.

Their whole gallery just changes styles so much it's probably all ripped from other artists

I understand your point, but I don't think this can work as a reason to be suspicious to the whole gallery. My style also changed a lot when I was just starting my journey as an artist.

You are right. Copying is not cool

I don’t want a repetition of this situation, not only for myself, but also for her. That is why I want to make this case public. Copying harms not only the artist who drew the original content, but also the one who copies it. The skill of the one who copies develops more slowly and then he cannot make art of the same level that they have without using someone else’s art.
A client who wants to get something original pays, and then discovers that this copy will suffer no less.

Having looked through that gallery I find it odd that none of these supposed commissions provide a link to the customer, or even a name if this was commissioned on another site like twitter or something. It does seem a little suspiscious so I may have to retract my previous comment about there not being anything shady going on.

I'd be tempted to say that maybe having a moderator look into this might be worth considering, even though I don't have much faith in them.