Curious about how people view commissioned art: Do you care if the artist shares the full-resolution file publicly, or does exclusivity/authenticity matter to you as a client? Why or why not?
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I generally prefer the high-res version as being kept exclusive to the purchaser, unless otherwise specified. I don't mind the artist sharing the low-res versions though.
I honestly don't mind either way. I see it like this: I paid for it, but the art was still made by the artist, so we both technically own it. If they want to post a full res somewhere, they can. It's up to them. Just don't charge other people for the full res if you don't provide it for your client.
Honestly, i as a commissioner love seeing the artist post it first on their social medias than once they post I’ll post it on mine just so they get the flow of interaction due to their work
Tbh I feel kinda sad if they DONT post it. Like there’s a lil bit of pride in sponsoring the artist, in the collaboration, and it feels good to see the artist is proud of the work they made for you
Youre supposed to have an Internet version of a picture and a full rez version of a picture for the commissioner and artist to put on their Artist Artwork CD compilation Vol1.
I WILL KEEP THIS TRADITION ALIVE!
As a client my main priority is supporting the artist. The way I see it the artist has already indulged me in the exclusivity of catering to my specific and often unhinged tastes. How they promote and share their art afterwards is a matter of however they run their freelance business.
I'd usually only post the "web" or glazed/nightshade versions on sites like fa/twitter/large discord groups. I'd use the full res if im using an artpiece as a reference with another artist(pose, character detail, color etc) or showing it to a close friend in private. I hope this is a helpful answer
I've had it both ways, as a customer and the artist. Some clients are cool with me sharing others want it private. I would like to always be able to share but if they're paying for it I don't question it.
That said, I've had some "free" "clients" that have wanted me not to post a piece. If I'm making something for free I'm posting, exclusivity is a paid service.
As a client, I really don't care much if the artist posts a full resolution piece. I only care when someone else tries to use it as their avatar or some other personal use without mentioning who the character belongs to or who was the artist that drew him.
I don't much care myself. As for sharing high res, I don't much know what sharing a high res image does. Like are people gonna save it and super zoom in?
If I may, Id like to add my own opinion to the pool.
Personally I feel that the full resolution image should belong exclusively to the commissioner. All those happy little details and the ability to zoom in and seem them makes it special.
I would personally add the addendum that I don't mind if the Hi-Res version is also given to Patreon or other crowdsourced income backers, but I understand why people would disagree with me on that.
I never post the full res, not even for my own personal work. although to be fair I don't have a deep-seated reason for doing so, it's just how I've done it for years.
To me it doesn't really matter earnestly. Art in the community for me represents just a conversation either an artist is having with their audience or a conversation and artist and their client are having.
In that sense I don't really see the point of exclusivity for a high quality images.
Though I understand if the artist wishes to withhold them as incentive for people to pay a bit more such as on Patreon sites, which is fine and also part of the conversation too.
It's not really a hot button topic for me since I enjoy just looking at the pieces and trying to figure out the story
"What were the conversations like? What sparked this piece? Someone being horny? A conversation that needed to be visualized? An attempt to appear more attractive? A gift to show appreciation for something? A specific period in time needing an outlet"
Exclusivity doesn't really matter to me, for me I like sharing the idea and the artist's work, I mean I'll resize for sites with limitations or that will resize it anyway, but I don't really think much if it's high rez or not
I honestly never ACTUALLY thought about it.
Of cou rse, if an artist asked that only the low-res version be shared, I'd honor that, but it's never really come up before.
For me it depends on why I was commissioning the artist. My most recent was just something that I wanted to see in the world. As such, I'm happy to have it widely shared.
Previously I commissioned artwork for my (defunct) podcast. I asked for the copyright and that it not be shared in advance.
I personally would very much rather keep the hi-res version myself as a client, but I can also understand that artists was to display their best when posting also for showing their best work to get more commissioners.
Hmmm 🤔
I don't mind if the artist shares the full resolution file for archival purposes publicly like on their telegram (so long as they credit me or @ me if I'm on a social media platform.) Because I love the art piece and would love to see more people appreciate it 🥰👍 1/2
Artist made the work, so long as it was a commission that was not private I think its perfectly valid for the artist to post the full res file to promote themselves and their work
I always ask if I can have the full res version for archival purposes if it isn't handed to me during or at the end of the commission process. It's also just nice to be able to see all the finer details
I personally post the resized and give the client both the resume for easier uploading and the fullsize for personal use (they paid for it so they should get the HQ,).
On the other hand, idc if my paid for HQ art is uploaded since I have that version, myself. HQ uploads encourage thieves though.
Tho lately, if they're cool with it, I'll share the high rez in my TG channel, especially for rendered pieces as a lot of textures get lost from compression.
Some artists I commission will give me 2 files of the final picture. One is the full size, another is a lower res for posting. I always use the lower res when I can.
I tend to give clients 50% or larger size images rather than the full size because it can be a 3000x4000 size image. But if they ask for the full size, I send it over no prob.
I upload smaller res images they look nicer in online galleries. I rather the small pic get scraped than the big one.
Also, why ain't anyone posting actual numbers of how big their images are? I feel like this is a really important aspect of posting high res or not if it's a 1500x2000 vs 3000x4000 image.
Personally, I have no problem with full-res getting posted ^^ but also, I think it's a virtue to have the option available in some fashion or otherwise express clearly your typical procedure (uploading/not) on the matter (can be as simple as a checkbox or notification on the comm form).
The only thing as an artist I specifically put in my T's and C's is the client can't sell/merchandise the work unless explicitly agreed.
As a client, I don't mind if they put work on their platforms paid or not. I see it as continued support of the artist themselves by letting them further profit.
So unless its a SUPER PERSONAL piece idc if the artist shares it- typically i encourage the artist to post it so I have a link that goes straight to their page that I can share with friends! Also i prefer to have the only no watermark version, with the public one watermarked
Comments
I WILL KEEP THIS TRADITION ALIVE!
I guess it would be different if you would specifically pay for "exclusive rights".
Personally I feel that the full resolution image should belong exclusively to the commissioner. All those happy little details and the ability to zoom in and seem them makes it special.
It also acts as an incentive/exclusivity to owning that piece of art.
In that sense I don't really see the point of exclusivity for a high quality images.
It's not really a hot button topic for me since I enjoy just looking at the pieces and trying to figure out the story
That's what I like the most in art
Of cou rse, if an artist asked that only the low-res version be shared, I'd honor that, but it's never really come up before.
Previously I commissioned artwork for my (defunct) podcast. I asked for the copyright and that it not be shared in advance.
I don't mind if the artist shares the full resolution file for archival purposes publicly like on their telegram (so long as they credit me or @ me if I'm on a social media platform.) Because I love the art piece and would love to see more people appreciate it 🥰👍 1/2
If I want some works to be kept private (maybe gifts or a project I have yet to reveal), I'll tell the artist right from the start of the commission.
And why? Because it's their work.
Much like other posts in here and from my previous experience commissioning a lot in the past, having the hi res feels special and authentic.
On the other hand, idc if my paid for HQ art is uploaded since I have that version, myself. HQ uploads encourage thieves though.
Some were confused about the concept of this, which in turn made me baffled
And it seems nowadays artists just post full res commissioned files for anyone to dl
So it made me wonder
As for exclusivity, I don't really have a strong opinion how the artist posts it as long as I get the full res in the end.
Tho lately, if they're cool with it, I'll share the high rez in my TG channel, especially for rendered pieces as a lot of textures get lost from compression.
I upload smaller res images they look nicer in online galleries. I rather the small pic get scraped than the big one.
As a client, I don't mind if they put work on their platforms paid or not. I see it as continued support of the artist themselves by letting them further profit.