Er... sorry but I have no answer. This is one situation I've never done or come across before. Wish I could do more.

It’s a common enough pose. If you didn’t take anything from the image in question, you don’t owe it anything. Keep yours up.

Yeah, it's a very common pose, seen it lots of time in photography and model shoots.

100% agree. I've seen this pose before. Personally I don't think this is a big deal.

You can't copyright poses, the same pose has been done a couple times by various artists and there are still differences between the two (like different arm poses and different ideas behind it)
You can keep the art up, coincidences happen a LOT among artists since someone is bound to draw the same pose/idea unless it's super unique. :X

these are definitely different in a ton of different ways. I would not even give it a second thought, anyone accusing you of stealing their work because of this should probably get their panties out of a twist. :)

I would have to agree. there are similarities, mostly in the idea of the pose. the poses themselves are different in a number of ways. How their legs are set, the shape of their rums, the difference in how they stand, one is up on heels, while Beth is standing flat.

If you used that picture as a reference, you did a piss poor job, if you'll excuse my language.

Artist here, In my opinion I say you shouldn't remove the piece. There are bound to be hundreds or even thousands of pieces of the same exact pose. I just alone know one girl in an art class I took years ago drew a piece just like that too. No one can really call a pose their own, and it's very obviously not traced. I'd say leave it be <3

It's not exactly a unique or complicated pose. I mean, if you should take it down because it's similar, doesn't that mean the other should as well since it's been done by the likes of Olivia or Boris Vallejo?

I say leave it up. Yes it was a coincidence and I feel that you shouldn’t have to take it down. It’s a harmless piece of art. Even great comic book artists have similar drawings/poses.

So no. Don’t remove it

Great image from a great angle sir. Not that crazy that two people would have that same idea for a piece. Fine job by you both. The more sexy booty the better. I say leave it up!

Keep, for sure. Maybe include that link to share a funny story about this sort of thing.

I hunted all over Fur Affinity for a way to edit submissions to include a link, but so far I haven't found a way. Is there a way? I've already edited the Deviant Art version of the pic to include the link.

I'm so out of it with managing my FA page, and I can't believe the site would be so weird as to not have a way to edit submission information.

Towards the bottom of your submission you should see these options: https://i.imgur.com/UssfSjJ.png

Thanks!

Shit, actually, I'm in the beta display. I don't have that.

Nevermind. Finally found it. Thanks again. :3

Glad I could help :D

On the submission page, click "change info." ^^

Thanks!

It is a spontaneous co-occurrence of an idea, like that happens. So you don't need to worry, like even if you had seen it, you can use it as a reference anyway.

The accusation was that I didn't cite the image as heavily referenced, as the accuser was convinced beyond any other assurances.

I don't think you have to cite a reference if you didn't reference it at all. The pose and angle are clearly something that multiple people would come to do without knowing of one another.. just like multiple people creating characters of same species and fur patterns without knowing of each other until later.

It's enough with saying that you didn't know about that other image, and you came to the pose and angle by your own creativity.

I believe the term is "parallel thinking."

Id say you are fine to keep it up, the idea has been remilled by plenty of other people. Your piece feels more anchored at the back of the gal's knees and the other aritst's piece feels like its squarely on the ass. The pieces share a similar frame but more as in an idea than what is actually shown.

This is one of those "Simpsons did it" kind of situations.

Just keep yours up~

Hah.

Honestly I could dig up another twenty examples that are very similar. I have seen this in photos and art. It is a beautiful pose that gets used by many. There are only so many poses out there. You drew it in good conscience and that is all your should need to sleep at the end of the day. There will always be people trying to bring you down.

I think you shouldn't worry about it. It's not like it's a unique position or even really THAT closely related. You have a history of being creative and amazing so why the hell would you need to heavily reference something this basic? Don't take shit from firestarters man.

Around 2008, I painted a picture with the exact same pillow as someone else's piece. The reason: I had that very same pillow in my house. The pose of the character wasn't the same but it was close enough to have a stranger start cursing me out with accusations and anger.

Since you asked for a general opinion: My thoughts are to not remove it. It's clear the accusers know nothing about creating art. Tell them to take a hike, or get a clue. Whichever comes first. Removing the piece will only hand a victory over to people who get their kicks from putting a wrench in others' gears. It's *clearly* not even close to being plagiarized or copied. Similarities end at the camera angle and subject matter.

All that said, you made a quality butt.

I'm not trying to be super rude, like how I might have been in the past, about these kinds of things. |3 But thank you. :3

heheh sorry, I probably shouldn't have added how to respond either. Best of luck!

Given that artists have been referencing photos and other art through all of history, I don't see a problem. It's vaguely similar, but obviously not traced or anything. It's a good composition and it wouldn't surprise me if lots of artists had rendered it independently.

This is purely coincidence, and even if it's not, so what? You didn't trace anything so it's obviously a show of your skill, and it's not an image that you're making a substantial amount of money over. Really just the poses are the same, more could be said if the characters and circumstances of the pic were similar, but they aren't.

If the accuser can prove that no one else has drawn a piece with this exact pose, you should take it down.
Barring that, keep it. What are they going to do, withhold their commission paym...ohhhhhhhh, right.

i'm gonna agree with the majority here - and consider the fact that this is NOT an uncommon "camera angle" either.

plus, there's enough different between the pictures that i wouldn't consider one to be a ripoff of the other, honestly.

I'll make it clear right away that I am not an artist, so if that belittles my opinion on this particular matter than feel free to do so.

Anyway, I commission all the art in my gallery from artists and styles both that appeal to me and that I can afford. I use reference images from sources that I can't even trace back to a "decent" source all the time. (usually this is caused by source material being linked to a Japanese only pixiv account which I can't read). I make clear in my messages that the reference images are not to be traced and to only be used as a more appropriate avenue to convey what I see in my mind's eye to the artist being commissioned so that the finished product is as close to originally envisioned as possible.

That being said, and looking more directly into your side by side comparison thing; yeah there are similarities, but for each one of those, in my opinion, there are two or three differences. It's arguable that your work is an interpretation of their work; however, when we get into the circumstances of the matter laid out before us... You didn't even know this fantasy image existed at first.....so how is that your fault exactly? In the grand scheme of things, honestly nothing at all is 100% original any more. By that assertion, should we all just hang up our brushes, break our pencils and stop creative vision altogether? OF COURSE NOT! As I said, for every similarity there are two or three differences, so what really is the issue here? Forgive me if I am sounding overbearing or overconfident, but I don't believe that you in any way shape or form encroached upon the toes of this other artist. I believe that they are both astounding images of great creative ability and that the both of them and the creators should be entirely respected. If the creator of the fantasy image feels affronted, then they need to get over themselves because you didn't even know about their work until now. And as for you in my opinion, I don't think you should sweat at all the similarities in the two works, whether it appears they might have been ripped off or not. FACT is, and this is more important, nothing about it is ripped off. It's a beautiful work that captures both lust and a bit of innocence, I say leave it up and don't sweat this situation at all. Honest coincidences happen, nothing is original anymore (arguably), and in the end, their art will appeal more to their niche and your art will appeal more to your own. Little to no damage at all is being done to either party at all, so why punish your work just because of a few entirely random similarities?

Just my two cents on the matter...again, completely disregard if you think I am speaking out of turn or if you disagree with anything I have wrote.

Artist here.

I see enough differences in the two pieces, that I wouldn't remove it just because the poses are very close to each other.

For example: I have seen so many different drawings with the "draw me like one of your French girls" poses.
Coincidences with poses are bound to happen.

So I'd say you should leave it up, and not worry too much of it.

In terms of "what should you do" then I believe you should at the very least reference the other piece when posting your work even if you were unaware of it before.

If the other artist is requesting you to take your work down, and you don't want to do that, then it becomes a legal question about what you "have to do" and I'm not sure there. Depends upon copyright law etc.

In a different realm: If it were a professional research publication, then you'd need to defer to the original even if you had not read it before writing your work. Review of work is done to try to help maintain that standard. IE if I come up with an algorithm independently, but it was published by someone 2 years ago, I don't get credit just because I didn't know about their paper. That's the standard so that we don't have to address this "do we trust the author" question; because that's too biased a question.

Dunno if this helps. XD

Oh, it's not the artist who drew the other picture. It's just some really zealous person, here. It's not a matter of legality. And I want to reference the other image on the submission, if I can figure out how to edit submissions.

I'd say you shouldn't bother with it at all. If you're really concerned, you could try messaging the original artist and ask if they're bothered by it at all.

The amount of similarities between these two works are so ridiculously low only a mental patient would point out that you referenced your art off the other image.
And hypothetically: if you lied for whatever reason, and did use it as reference, or even traced it initially? You did a damned well job on making it your own with literally all the different details it has. Up to the point that it's just a completely new and original concept and piece art on itself.

I agree with the Alphasoldier. You plan to add a link to the submission information, so that should be good enough. You're far more conscientious about this sort of thing than a lot of people. I doubt many would have drawn the correlation considering how common a pose it really is.

I can clearly see that you didn't so much as glance at this other piece while working on yours. I'd say do nothing, honestly. Common pose, especially for sexy subject matter, so it's not anywhere close to being a problem.

ive done worse lol your pose is similar but I don't see much else

8 billion people on this earth, a good percentage are artists, and drawing sexy poses has a mathematical limit for variation. Eventually people will draw what others have done, it's bound to happen.
Just do what other artists do: slyly wink at each other, give a nod of approval and admiration for having similar tastes, and out-do your last pic.
Now if you were to copy a Charlie Brown comic page-by-page... that'd be different. >:P

Keep it posted! Both pieces are unique in their own way.

Just leave it. Fuck em.

You didn't know about the pose so who cares? Even if you did nobody can lay claim to a pose or angle. If you could there would be a bunch of people going around saying crazy things like nobody can draw a character with their hands on their hips because they did it first.

I would say to leave it up. They are different enough, and despite the similarities, you didn’t reference, copy, or trace the similar image. You are completely innocent, you have done nothing wrong, and your drawing is amazing.

I'm sure you could find 100 other pieces with the same pose.

And even if not, it's not like they own the pose. Hell, even if you HAD been using that image as a reference, I don't think that'd matter.

You can not copyright poses. And the pose is similar, but as others have stated, I am sure there are hundreds of drawings with this same pose in mind. I think you are fine. :)

Copyright isn't the issue. It's the inference that I used the image for reference without indicating it when I posted it. Which I didn't.

I don't feel that you need to put a link to the image since you didn't reference it. The images are so different to the clothing, her hands, his hands. Not to mention, the detail you have between her legs and to the side where the other image lacks due to darkness being implied.

I understand though the feeling of being called out by someone who doesn't have much better to do. If it gives you piece of mind to have the link in the description, then I say go for it. I just wish people wouldn't waste their time calling out an artist everyone knows does their own work and wouldn't do anything to offend another artist in such a way.

If she could draw that inference, someone else could as well. So, I'll leave the link to the other image in place, along with my explanation.

Hello Hisk,

Yes some one else could have the same though. Does it really matter?

What is the next step calling out some one who drew a chest? a face? a nude? because other artiste previously did it?
Should I call you out for that? http://www.furaffinity.net/view/14035763/ because it reminde me of Gustave Courbet "L'origine du monde" http://www.konbini.com/wp-content/b.....de-810x454.jpg and you could have used it as a reference?

If one day you get an epiphany from an other artist work and you do you own version of it or does an original work that is a lot inspired from it give it credit until that moment you've not to do anything.

Fairly similar, but how many pictures of this pose and framing exist with the genders switched?

Up to you how you choose to go about this, but I think people who actually know you as an artist know well enough that you generally do most of your art, poses, framing, anatomy and all, pretty much off the cuff. If you don't think there will be a legal ramifications to this I'd say leave things as is.

That'd be interesting to search for. But I don't want to do it. :3

Even Charles Darwin fell victim of that: there was a young biologist developing similar ideas to his (but in an earlier stage) when Darwin was working in The Origin of Species. Convergence is a common natural ocurring fenomena.
You are well known for your skills and creativity, acusing you of copying from someone else is kinda silly. Keep your art up.

"Simpson's did it"? XD

Similar, sure? But what isn't similar to something else anymore...? I'm sure we could find several similar poses if we looked hard enough. I wouldn't worry over it. Xp

I don't really see all that much similarity in it at all. The composition, angle, presentation, theme, subject matter, pose, perspective... they're all completely different. There's literally no similarities other than it shows a female's ass from the back.

And the guy face-level with her genitals. Which caused me to draw his thighs in the only place they could be in that position.

Well, that too, but still. I even saw the comment on the original illustration by you, it's really hard to not call her out on her self-indulgent self-righteous hypocrisy. Hell I did a test just for shits and giggles, and reverse-image searched your illustration and whaddaya know the quote-unquote 'source' pops up in the visually similar images.

Don't even sweat it, Fisk. It's just an attention whore abusing the vast resources of the internet to witch hunt some other dude out of envy or something. It's happened to me plenty of times with some of my artwork, hell sometimes people come after me for drawing something from a reference and actually crediting the original artist. I say don't waste your time fighting her on it. If she wants to get a wild stick up her ass, just ask to see her accreditation for being an art teacher and send her on her way.

Hell, for all we know she could be a Sarkeesianite or something... the fucking horror.

I don't really want to entertain mean speculation about her motives, as if they aren't just what they are. I think she's probably just really zealous and probably a little unaware of how rude and unfair she's being.

Lucky. I tried a reverse search after you mentioned it. All I got was bad tattoos and emo anime screencap edits. XD;;

Maybe, google just showed me what my soul looks like.

I don't even see "HEAVILY referenced"... Leg spacing, musculature, positioning of both sets of arms, build, clothing - all noticeably different.

The only possible "reference" is the general idea of a woman standing in front of a kneeling male (seated on his heels). The 'other' image isn't even an "undressing" image! If someone has a stick up their ass about it, recommend them some Preparation H. Then ignore them.

who wouldnt draw a keister shot of Beth like that?

...So... this intolerant and inconsiderate individual, and I read the comment on your submission seems to think that this artist should have a full copyright on any full from behind butt shots hm?
Considering yours is two fur's the male removing the panties of the female, and there is not total nudity, it bares NO relation to the supposed 'reference'
The supposed reference is a considerably thinner female, completely nude, but wearing heels. The male is a very obvious DEMON with his arms, and tail wrapped around her legs.

It is beyond tolerable to me that, that individual had the audacity to act like that.

Your submission is great and their ridiculous and out right preposterous assertion is insulting. To you, to the original artist of the supposed 'reference' and really all other artists, period. I'm actually quite frustrated now, i'm going to go make something nice to eat.

She wasn't saying it was a copyright issue. She was just *certain* that I had used that other image as reference and didn't mention it when I posted my image. Some kind of demand for integrity, combined with an accusation I can't possibly disprove, despite my innocence. And yeah, the rude, horns-forward, hostile tone from the start.

Honestly, no matter what you do, they just assume they're right. It's a bit sad seeing someone so argumentative about it.

The images are completely different, even if they have a concept in common. And for a second matter, the action/energy in the images are entirely different.
-In yours it's an anticipation, still a tease. He hasn't done anything yet, he's just undressing her. She's standing in a casual, comfortable way, arms loose.
- In the other, The energy is far more sexual. the demon is very obviously mid cunnilingus. She's standing tense, feet planted, back arched and they're each holding each other where they are.

For everything she's done to say 'you copied!', they are completely different images and concepts.

And if she can't take your word at face value, then it only makes them look bad. Especially again, being how different these images are. The only similarity being a woman, scene from a low angle from behind, with a person kneeling in front. Hell, I've seen similar shots of people proposing before. =/

It did tickle me a bit that she alluded to using overlays to ensure I didn't trace.

Yeah, hahah. Same here.

Also, I am happy that everyone else has been adult on the matter. Not jumping in on the thread or her shouts. =)

Hi there!
This is just what happened to Guillermo del Toro on his recent movie "The Shape of Water" once
the film was a succes it was come to light that there was a finish video on youtube that had an ENORMOUS simility with the movie that he created but he started the movie planning on 2009 and the video was on 2015 but they made a journal about that kind of things.

On the world of art this happen very often, a lot of artists have the same creative process and end up making similar things , like REALLY similar but its due to happen specially on drawed art since our brain keeps the images of good poses in our head , also that the poses are not copyrighted.

hope it helps and you have an awesome day :)

There's over 7 billion people on this planet. Sometimes things are gonna be similar. I don't believe this to be a big deal as there are many noticable differences between the two

It's not terribly similar, leave it up.
If the person wants to cry wolf, well, those two are obviously cats, so.

Have to disagree with pretty everyone here, given I've never seen this particular positioning before in my years here on FA. However, it's unlikey the accuser will want to step up with you because you're arguably the biggest name in furry art and this person will get flooded with references lol

I wouldn't want to boil an issue down to the ability to intimidate, though.

Would create a bigger mess. But you know how it goes with followers

Where do you think the other artist copied from? Real life experience.

So you're both going to be sued by God.

More seriously, if the other artist were to have a go at you, you might take it more seriously, but some random individual is just hot air. Tell them to ask the other artist, and the other artist is liable to laugh at them.

Honestly that individual is known for drama and grasping at straws all over the furry fb community (among other things). They have even started putting up bewares about this in the groups (one of them mine but it was rejected)

It's a butt shot, there are hundreds like it, but this ones yours.

She does seem rather haughty.

I guess I was right in stating her outrage was self-indulgent if she's going around to groups talking about this trying to stir things up.

They are only similar in that each feature someone kneeling with a female standing between the legs of the kneeler - that's it.

Take any sex scene or pose and if you look long and hard enough you're going to find either another drawing or a photo that's similar.

Here - twist the angle of the photo of this statue around and guess what, you both "ripped off" the artist who did the statue.

http://www.tretyakovgallerymagazine.....rway_05_05.jpg

The "camera angle" is ~0° and the pose is fairly generic. Those two pictures likely have nothing to do with each other.

I feel if you had no idea of the other image when drawing yours you don’t need to give any credit. You can’t copywrite a pose

There's a bunch of differences.

1. The closer character's arms are in a different place
2. The closer character is wearing shoes and socks.
3. The tail is not wrapping around the closer character's legs.
4. The arms are not wrapped around the closer character's thighs.

etc etc.

There is no such thing as originality anymore, coincidences like this are bound to show up.

Keep it up, there's probably a bunch more in your gallery you don't know about too. :P
If you draw for long enough you will inevitably draw the same ideas as other people.

Looking at both side by side and reading what your accuser said, it was very clearly misguided judgment and jealousy.
Look at them, really look at them; the actual size and shape of the woman’s legs and butt are nowhere near the same. The mans arms clearly are not in the same place with the same idea. Little details like clothes and leg stance, it’s still obviously different.
You were right Jay. You have been around for a long time, drawing even longer, but it’s not as if you need a visual reference every single time. Looking at you accuser and seeing that they “have been drawing almost all their life”, but still need references is projection and petty. Not to mention they were condescending toward you. Keep it up Jay. You’re leagues better than they are and I hope they see this.

That pose is coincidental at best. There are only so many ways to position two humanish bodies when one is using mostly symmetrical poses that have been drawn time and time again in varying quality and theme.

If the idea is that people will think you're copying somebody, I'd really not worry about it.
If you're annoyed that you feel like you copied somebody and can't get over that thought though, do what you need to do for peace of mind - but it seems like a waste to me.

i dont think is a big deal honestly. ^^;;

It's not surprising at all that an image somewhere on the Internet looks similar. They are naive to think that that is actually significant. These images are only similar in a very general sense; the details are all different. Most likely they just happened to have viewed the other image recently, and got a sense of déjà vu when they saw yours. Happens to me sometimes, but that doesn't mean I should assume it was because they were referenced. Poses and angles in particular are reused all the time.

So then what's the issue here? They look similar, so what? There's nothing wrong about that. I know you're trying to be responsible and prevent any misunderstandings, but I don't think there will be any. It was just one random person out of thousands who overreacted. You never referenced that image so it has nothing to do with yours, and thus there's no reason to link to it. If anything, it's more confusing when you do that because of how unusual it is. It's not an artist's responsibility to link to things that "might be confused as a reference". Can you imagine doing that for every image? It would be like trying to not offend anyone: literally impossible. There's always going to be that one person out there...

So just forget about them and move on. The fact that they were so rude about it makes it that much easier. There's no need to get stressed over something that can't get you in trouble. Trying to please everyone is not worth your time.

Looks pretty generic to me, just leave it up. no ones gonna care

its a basic pose, the camera isnt in a dynamic pose.
you drew anthros, rather than human
yours has her hair down
its not full body
they are clothed.

all in all, i think your fine. you cant copy right a pose or idea, and even the greatest artists will tell you 'al artists copy one another. nothing is new anymore. only drawn differently'

i say keep it up. its a beautiful piece!

I have an illustration book by Spanish artist Luis Royo that (I think) has a very similar drawing as the one by the other artist. And it's much closer to HIS version (given that Royo creates Lovecraft-inspired erotic images) than yours, and I'm willing to bet it predates both of your images.

It's a "scene of Jennifer Connelly on a pier" situation (in case you don't know what I'm talking about: http://www.filmbuffonline.com/FBOLN.....lly-on-a-pier/ ): visual artists create very similar ideas on their own by pure chance. It just happens sometimes.

I myself am no stranger to that situation. I'm a musician, not a visual artist, but MANY riffs I've written in the past sound very similar to riffs in songs I had never heard before (in my case, it happened so much it wasn't even funny anymore). It sucks, sure, but it wasn't intentional.

In my opinion, it's nothing to worry about. If you want, you can set up a disclaimer saying that it's been brought to your attention that these two images are very similar, but it was just a coincidence. If you must, contact the original artist and explain the situation to them. But, in my honest opinion, there are enough differences there, and as has been said before, nobody own copyright on poses, so you shouldn't worry about such claims.

Mm! I'm familiar with this happening in movies.

In any of the arts (and in engineering) it's far more common than you might expect for different people to independently come up with the same ideas. Sometimes people don't realize this and when two works appear with uncanny similarities, they jump to the conclusion that one copied the other. Unfortunately, our intellectual property legal system often fails to recognize this.

I say leave it up.

Leave it - that happens so often...

Over and over again I've had ideas of my own, sometimes shared with my best friend, and later we've seen a similar thing emerge (be it in a new film, videogame, some older work previously unknown to us, etc).
It used to upset me when I was younger, but now I say screw it.
My friend and I now jokingly refer to these as "time thieves" incidents - as if having the audacity to declare these ideas were indisputably mine once I thought of them, and they were somehow stolen. =p
That doesn't happen. This is still your art, and is wholly original - despite whatever artist, past or future, independently conjures a similar idea.

Both artworks and pose are pretty different IMHO

Honestly it happens and I wouldn't worry about it. There is nothing that hasn't already done by someone else. It's obviously not a copy or a trace. I wouldn't say the camera angle is the same either. Yours is a tad lower. It's a simple pose done from a simple angle that I'm sure many have done before. You did pull it off amazingly and it's in my faves so I'd rather you didn't remove it!

It's a very common pose, so I wouldn't remove it from your gallery. Besides, no one owns poses as far as I know.

I see nothing wrong with using a reference. You can even say in some cases that nothing is original except the very first original. Such as the whole "Cover of Crisis on infinite Earths" (where Superman is holding a dead Super Girl) compared to the last panel of Batman holding Jason Todd in the "Death in the Family" story arc. Yes it is similar, but different in ways. I'd say it's not an issue unless it was a blatant copy of the original that was trying to be passed off as an original.

In all honesty, to be compared to that art then I would consider it a compliment.

The positioning is nearly the same with only a variation on the hands and attire (heels definitely change the dynamics of the legs) but there's enough variation and difference to claim honest coincidence. Nobody does a 100% unique pose anymore since there's probably an artist out there that's done the same thing at some time before, so just accept it and move on knowing that someone else had the same idea as you and may have made their art before you came up with the concept.

It happens.

Leave it up, Mr. Naylor! As everyone above has said, there's no copyright on poses, and besides, I know there'd be a line of guys and girls that'd want to be in that position with Beth!

I would keep it up. Not out of defiance, but rather because it's impossible for every piece of art to be 100% different. The Human(iod) body can only pose in so many positions before different art styles begin to overlap.

I personally use a lot of photos or other artist's work for reference when drawing positions I've never done before, because it helps me put on paper what I'm visualising in my head.

My suggestion - If you used a reference, give credit if you can, if you didn't use a reference then don't worry about it. And, honestly, unless the Artist themself is accusing you of Tracing their work, or claiming their work as your own (plagiarizing), I wouldn't really worry about it.

You're a great artist. I'm not ashamed to admit that your work has helped me in the past.

That's clearly what I hate about people saying "this is a heavy reference! You stole it! Delete it now!".
(I know, sometimes it can be true, and nobody told you this from what I understood... at least I hope)

Man, the camera angle is just a "front" angle. VERY classic.

The pose is just someone standing up and another in kneels. BOTH positions for the 2 characters ARE classic with the situation you intended to draw.

WHY would you delete it? WHY would it be something bad to keep it or even to have drawn this while a similar picture is existing?

To be honest, I'm 100% sure there were a lot of similar drawings in similar positions before the ones from you and the artist you linked, and I'm sure there'll be a ton more. Maybe some of them will be voluntarily heavily referenced, probably a lot of them won't be and will just be drawn by accident.

So, my question is this one: "Why would you delete the drawing you spent hours (maybe minutes if you're fast?) to make for a so poor reason?"

For me, the answer is simple: "Just don't. Keep your drawing, that's perfectly fine."

Somewhere around, I've got a sketch I was going to finish out into a color piece thats nearly the same thing.

Its two females, so very slightly different. No clothes though, just nudes.
But it was drawn something like 14 years ago, and never touched since.

So I'd have to say, similar ideas happen for poses, and I'd just leave it.

'I find pieces of furry art using similar or nearly the same pose as my older pieces all the time.
Doesn't bother me, unless its clearly a trace or something.

-Badger-

It's a very common pose. I don't think it needs to be taken down. You can just put a little astrisk noting that it was brought to your attention, but is a coincidence.

There are a lot of common poses out there, and I can't imagine these would be the only two examples of this one. You could leave it and not really lose anything.

Just my tiny two cents here, I have had an idea like this, and likely seen a few too in the past.
The pose is nice and not too complicated, and I too havn't seen that image that you where linked, before today.

So keep your lovely work, and don't worry.
It's a clear coincidence, and those happen.

Looking at it as an artist myself, I don't see much similarity in the actual work, it doesn't look referenced at all.

So what's the inference? That you copied the image? If so that's ridiculous; overlaying the images will show that they're completely different (shape of the hips, size of the feet, angle of his legs, and tons of other little details). You have nothing to worry about, there's enough different to make it clear you didn't copy it.

If the inference is that you used the image as a reference, then again there's enough different to show otherwise, and second...who cares? There's nothing wrong with looking at an image and saying "I like that pose", as long as you don't straight-up copy it.

The inference was that I used that image for reference or inspiration or something, but didn't credit the image when I uploaded my image.

You're fine. Your styles are different, the poses have their own differences, the pose is not unique, etc. Just because a pose is similar doesn't mean there's a problem. A lot of people try to make it a problem.

Look at it this way. Pretend you drew a ref sheet and the character had long hair and cat ears.

Someone comes to you and says "Hey you copied this!" and they show a ref sheet of a character. This character has long hair and cat ears. But the styles are different, different gender, different body type, etc. The ONLY similarities between these two is long hair and cat ears. Doesn't that scenario sound silly?

That's how this scenario is on the uh... person who brought this to you is. They are being extremely silly and trying to build a mountain out of a molehill. Never listen to these people. Otherwise we're gonna lose all art ever because by law of the universe everything has been done before.

you can't copyright a pose... even if you did steal the 'pose' that's like saying you drawing people in real life is copying their organic poses they created irl. :/ even a direct redraw of someone else's image isn't a problem unless you're profiting off of it directly. art on patreon i dont think even counts under that jurisdiction

Everything that exists will eventually be similar to something else :) That's just how the world works. Your art is wonderful, and I see no reason to remove it simply because someone somewhere else had a similar idea that just happened to look similar.

There is no way IMHO either pic is a clone of the other. Each was drawn with a similar pose and perspective, but the art styles are noticeably and apparently different.

I say keep it up. As others have said, y'can't copyright a pose, and that's all that's really similar between the two pieces.

I say keep yours up.

While there are some unique similarities in the positioning and the overall framing of the characters. They are not identical. By which I mean, yours is more a close up to the booty, where as the other is a full on body shot of the female model. More so, there's more of a symmetrical design to the image on the right, yours is asymmetrical.

Visually, the two may come off as identical. They are not the same and one can still see that they are not related or referenced off the other.

So again I say Keep yours up.

Don't sweat it. The pose is all but generic at this point

Let's face it, the subject matter between the two pieces is completely different. Besides, you specialize in PORN, not demons and or anything dark or Lovecraftian. Anyone who says otherwise is grasping at straws and clearly has nothing better to do with their time. Most would say this person has a stick up her ass, sounds to me like she's got the whole tree and a Redwood at that. To claim a pose needs citing because it was the first one around to be made in such a way is like saying that we have to reference the people who invented the first language every time we speak our own native tongue, because imagine how tedious that would be. There was probably even a pose in an art piece that was made before the piece this person is mentioning, but they dont know who originally came up with it, neither do we. The artist who made that piece probably didn't even know either. Way I see it, originality is very finite in regards to the amount of people who come up with them, but it doesn't mean we can't appreciate them.

Keep it. Honestly heavy referencing....who even gives a shit lol As an artist I can tell you that no matter what you draw someone can always fin something that looks really similar. Just keep it up. At the end of the day who eve gives a shit xD Even if you DID heavy reference there are enough differences to justify transformation of the pose and artistic creativity.

As similar as the aspects of each are, I would personally say that each is their own thing. I would keep it.

Honestly, while the art is similar, there's vast differences that be seen in the how the buttocks are drawn, her leg placement, feet, along with both of their arms, and how the fantasy piece puts emphasis on her back arcing slightly at her hips.

Honestly, keep the piece up. I've drawn mountains of things at this post, and Nothing I've shared that was directly mine comes from any reference on another piece. If I was doing like you did, I would leave it. Any kind of offense someone might have can be deferred by the above differences, along with the amount of the subjects visible being another difference. Any other resemblance is just coincidence.

When you really think about it there are only a finite amount of poses one can do with the human figure. Every pose, from every angle, has probably been done a thousand times over by now. I wouldn't worry about it

In my honest opinion, even if it WAS referenced as people are trying to call you out for, I don't think it would be considered heavily referenced enough to worry about; from a mediocre artist's perspective as mine....

In that demon one, he's holding his arms differently and doing something totally different than ripping off her undies or pulling them down as yours is showing.

Also if you look closely the legs aren't even in the same position...His is more forward sitting and in yours the legs are more spread apart more.
The only thing similar to me is that hes on his knees in front and shes standing up in front of him...that's not a big deal? :O
Hope it blows over, your art looks great :)

There are millions of artists online. The similarities are unavoidable. I am not sure if this was intentional but looks really similar.
And the pose itself is often in porn/erotic art and photo.

Well since it wasn't intentional why truly worry.

To think 1 person or group can OWN a pose and position is a rather scary thought. Before long there would be no poses and camera angles left. I'm sure with a good deal of work you might be able to find half a dozen shots close to this. Including many real life poses.

Pfft. It's like a form of parallel evolution. Be flattered that someone even made the comparison as they're both good pieces of art. Unless someone can prove tracing, you're fine. Don't worry over nothing, man.

I don't think Beth will be confused with the piece made by frank franzetta the piece before the piece that was referenced was referenced off of another piece. Dont let it worry you. Completely different all three of them. all of the butts and clothing are different and they all mean something different piece by piece.

Superficial similarity. Your camera is lower, the horizon lower. Whilst the pose is similar, the subject matter and what is intended is different. And I like yours better.

Honestly, unless it was a trace I wouldn't take it down. Similarities will always happen throughout art and media and no one person can really say that they own a pose but tracing, on the other hand, is different since it is actually using someone else's work while having to do little to none of your own.

Obviously not a copy just similar. Leave it.

And if you see something you do like, re-drawing something that is not a trace is fair game. At this point in time about every pose possible is likely done somewhere.

from my understanding of copyright law, you can't copyright a general pose. so especially since you didn't even know about the other image beforehand (and, as others have posted, it's a common pose) it's all good. it's also a very nice pose for beth

Copyright isn't the issue. More of an integrity thing.

But the pose is common. I've seen it a dozen times at least. I think there's even a YCH offered by someone I follow with a similar pose.

People always want something to complain about, art has been around since man has been around. There are millions of artists out there. It's not possible to come up with something that's never been done before imho. There will always be something that resembles something else someone has done. I'm sure if you look hard enough you can find tons of drawings similar to this, and tons of still life real photos as well.

Personally, i think you should do whatever you think is best in this situation. I find that if the accusations aren't true, in time they'll blow over if you ignore them. Especially in a case like this, where honestly there's only a superficial similarity to the pic in question.

You shouldn't delete your own original artwork just because some cunt of a bitch is too stuck up to believe she could possibly be wrong because her Facebook friends agree with her! The fact is that you created this entirely from your mind and you have nothing to prove or worry about. :3

You know how furries love drama.

It's all been done before

Nawh seriously, you didn't trace the image or the pose, there's infinite combinations of postures and poses so there's bound to be overlap.

Beyond the very basic elements of the pose it doesn't really look very similar to me.

Good on you for being up front about it. I hope the commenter is feeling a bit embarrassed by now. Their observation, however sincerely it might have been conceived, seems rather naive, considering how much art there is out there. She's probably gotten more attention than her criticism deserves.

Aside from all of this, LOVE the picture. Definitely very well done, and happens to push some of my particular buttons...

I'm really late to this part, so my apologies. I see the similarities but I think the differences (at least contextually) are enough that I can overlook it personally. Honestly, and this isn't to be insulting or negative at all, I don't think it's a terribly original visual anyways, it's kind of just generalized. Now there's nothing wrong with that, imo! But maybe something to consider.