umbralsong

[umbralsong]

Not in death, but just in sleep, the fateful prophecy you'll keep. And from this slumber you shall wake, when true love's kiss, the spell shall break.

SLEEPING BEAUTY 1959, dir. Clyde Geronimi, Eric Larson, Wolfgang Reitherman, Les Clark

[umbralsong]

Annie: There are legends of people born with the gift of making music so true, it can pierce the veil between life and death; conjuring spirits from the past...and the future. In ancient Ireland, they were called Filí. In Choctaw land, they called them Fire Keepers. And in West Africa, they were called Griots. This gift can bring healing to their communities. But it also...attracts evil....

Sinners (2025)

[umbralsong]

Also hate the fact that white people just can slap “I’m autistic and hyper fixating” when you call them out for being racist and centering white characters in a black centered movie because I swear they use that to escape all accountability nowadays

[umbralsong]

Shadowheart

Concept art for Baldur's Gate 3

*Artist Unknown* If you know comment below

[umbralsong]

.

[umbralsong]

Disney's Cinderella (1950) - concept art by Mary Blair x final animation

[umbralsong]

If you think you have never stolen artwork, read this post.

So, art theft. If you’ve been a follower of mine, you’ve heard my barely-coherent rants about this before, but I thought it might be more productive to make a more coherent post on the subject.

If you’re wondering about the title of the post here, it’s because I feel like a lot of people aren’t really grasping what exactly art theft is, and a LOT of people, even well-meaning ones, do it without even realizing it.

“But wait,” you say. “I would never STEAL from an artist!! I never claim it as my own!” And that’s all fine and good, but you’re missing something here.

To start things off, what IS art theft? (It’s not what deviantART said it was several years back, I’ll tell you that much. *cough*)

We all know what art is, so let’s talk about theft. Dictionary.com defines “theft” as “the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.” Okay, makes sense, but what about that other word there, stealing? Dictionary.com defines “steal” as “to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force.”

From those definitions, we can go on to define art theft as, specifically, “taking art without permission or right.” In the context of art, that typically involves reposting it (not reblogging–reblogging is different) or using it for other things.

And there, my friends, is the issue.

If something is taken or used without permission, it is stolen. Permission is the important thing here–if an artist says “oh yeah, you can go ahead and use this!” then it’s not stolen. You have their permission. But if you DON’T have that, then it IS stolen. It IS theft.

“But I’m not claiming it as my own!” you say. But you don’t have to claim it as your own–the act of taking it in and of itself is an act of theft.

“But I said ‘credit to the artist!’” The “credit” thing is a whole other conversation, but here’s the short of it: The entire point of credit is to direct people to the source of something. If you are not directly linking to where you got the art from, you are not giving credit. “Credit to the artist” is not actually credit of any kind whatsoever. (Also, Google and Pinterest are not sources.)

“But I DID link back to the artist!” Okay, now this is where it may get confusing, because you may think you’re covered because you actually did give credit. Here’s the problem: if you reposted it or used it without permission, regardless of whether you gave credit or not, it’s still stealing.

I’m bolding this because it’s a point that a lot of people get tripped up on. Let me explain it this way: If you went into your neighbor’s house and took something of theirs without their permission, but you told people “oh yeah, I got this from [neighbor]’s house!” that that would still, of course, be stealing, and it’s no different for art.

Another thing is that even when you credit, people don’t always check the source. Very recently I found a case where someone had reposted a piece of artwork of mine to Pinterest that was deliberately made to look like it came from the source material (it wasn’t meant to confuse anyone, though–the description of my original post made it very clear that it was fanart). The person who reposted had linked back to my original post. The problem? The comments had people asking if this was official, where it happened in the source material, etc. Despite the fact that the source was right there, no one thought to look at it.

Even if you link back to the source, if you did it without the artist’s permission, it’s still stealing, and still causes problems for us artists.

“But I just posted it to my Pinterest–” DO NOT DO THIS. DO NOT POST AN ARTIST’S WORK TO PINTEREST IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THEIR EXPLICIT PERMISSION TO DO SO.

“But this artist friend of mine says they’re okay if I post their work to my Pinterest so long as I link back to them!” Good for your friend! But the fact that your friend is okay with it doesn’t mean that all artists are okay with it. For me, personally, I am very not okay with my work being posted to Pinterest, and say as much on my art blog description and posts (which people tend to ignore).

The problem with Pinterest–and reposting art in general–is that we artists don’t know when it happens unless we’re told, or unless we find it ourselves. It causes us to lose control of our art. And because of this, our art can spiral further out of our control, because when our works get posted to Pinterest or other similar websites, people who have no grasp whatsoever on how art works will just take it as “free art” and then use it for whatever they want.

That’s how a piece I spent 20+ hours on was used as a poster for a paid event, without my permission, and without any payment or credit to me.

If an artist has said nothing about Pinterest (or other similar image sharing sites), your default should be to assume that they don’t want their artwork posted there.

“Well I didn’t repost someone’s art, but I did use it for my avatar/RPing icon/video/fic cover/photo edit–” That’s still stealing. If you’re using it without their permission for any reason, that is stealing. Not to mention, the artist may not be cool with what you’re using their art for anyway. (Looking at you, people who use platonic art in your shipping videos.)

“I MEANT to ask them for permission, but I forgot!” This can ONLY happen if you used the artwork BEFORE you asked for permission. You can resolve this by asking for permission BEFORE you use it, rather than assuming the answer will be “yes” and using it before asking.

“But it took me a really long time to make that icon/video/cover/edit!!” How long do you think it took the original artist to draw their piece? It doesn’t matter how much work you put into modifying someone else’s art–if you’re doing it without their permission, you’re still stealing.

“But I couldn’t find the original artist! I tried to find them, I really did, but I couldn’t. Is it okay to use their art then?” No, because you still don’t have permission, and by reposting it anyway, you’re continuing to make the artwork spiral out of their control.

“What if I found the artist, but they speak a different language from mine? I can’t ask them for permission, so is it okay if I repost their art anyway?” NO!! DO NOT DO THIS!! If there is a language barrier, use Google translate or find someone to translate for you and get a hold of the artist that way to ask them for their permission. The language barrier is NEVER an excuse to steal artwork. There are plenty of non-English-speaking artists who have taken ALL OF THEIR ARTWORK OFFLINE because the art theft was completely out of control. (And this isn’t just exclusive to English-speakers stealing art from people who don’t speak their language. It happens artists who don’t speak English stealing art from English-speakers, too, but as this post is written in English it doesn’t do much good for me to rant about this here.) If you can’t ask their permission, do not use it!!

“But what about reblogging?! Isn’t that the same as reposting?? Should we not reblog art at all then?” No, reblogging (or retweeting) is not the same as reposting. If you reblog art, you keep all the information that we attached to the art, including our blog name and the description attached to the art. Reblogging/retweeting actually helps us artists A LOT, so as long as you’re reblogging from the original artist (and not someone who’s reposting their art), by all means, reblog our art!

“What if I just want to share someone else’s artwork on Discord or show it to a friend?” This one’s a bit different and is not actually as problematic. If you want to share our work on Discord or whatever, just link directly to where we posted it. Please don’t post the art itself, unless you’re doing it alongside a link because Discord won’t show a preview or something.

“What about a forum or a site like Reddit?” This one’s a bit different, since due to the way Reddit functions, if you LINK to the art, you have to go directly to the artist’s original page to view it. (At least, that’s what it’s like the last time I was active there.) In a way it’s roughly the same as with Discord–be sure you’re linking directly to the actual post rather than just uploading the art on its own–but I would also ask the artist if they’re okay with it, because they may be a member of the subreddit or forum and want to post it themselves, or they might not want their work shared to specific communities. (Some communities have a function where a bot will repost the artwork to Imgur, and some artists don’t want that done with their art.)

“What if I’m saving it to my computer/phone to look at later, or making it into my desktop/phone wallpaper?” IMO this is fine, since your computer/phone files aren’t public, and neither is your wallpaper. It’s only a problem when you post it to public places without our permission.

“What if it’s art I commissioned?” Well… like… in that case, it’s art you paid for, so unless the artist you commissioned laid out very specific terms for you, you should be good to use that art. Like, at most, the artist may ask you to credit them somewhere in your blog description if they drew your icon or something, or credit them in a fic description if you commissioned a fic illustration from them, or something to that effect. It’s really something you should have already worked out with the artist beforehand, but for the most part you should probably be fine to use art you paid for however you like.

“What about art I requested?” This is a bit different from commissioned work. Just because the art was drawn at your request doesn’t mean it’s explicitly yours (unless it’s like, a drawing of your original character or something). Some artists take requests more as suggestions, so the art they draw in response to a suggestion or request is still theirs. Treat this as you would any other artwork and ask the artist for permission first before you do anything with the artwork you requested from them.

“What about NFTs?” … Okay this one I can’t really go over too much because I barely understand it in the first place, but NFTs are BAD for artists and are a form of art theft. Do not turn people’s art into NFTs. This is a crappy thing to do. (If you want more information on this one, you’ll have to look it up yourself. It’s a form of cryptocurrency and it’s confusing.)

“If you don’t want your art stolen you shouldn’t post it in the first place.” This is fascinating logic. Try applying it to something else and see how it holds up. “If you don’t want your merchandise stolen, you shouldn’t open a booth.” “If you don’t want to get poisoned you shouldn’t eat food.” “If you don’t want to get punched in the face, don’t walk outside.” Yes. Flawless logic. Truly.

“Why do you care so much, anyway?! I’m sharing your art because I like it! That’s a compliment! Shouldn’t you be happy?” Well, we’re certainly glad you like our art, but the problem is… as I’ve said before, reposting our art causes us to lose our control over it. When we lose control of our art, that damages our livelihood. As I said before, other people have made money off of my artwork. As well, some artists lose jobs because when their potential employers check out their portfolio, they may find artwork that’s been reposted everywhere online, so they cannot hire the artist because they believe they may have stolen the artwork in their own portfolio.

Your reposting an image you thought was cute to Facebook or Pinterest could cost an artist their job. Think about that.

So, tl;dr, keep this in mind: you need the artist’s permission to repost or use their artwork. If you do not have it, it is stealing, even if you credit the artist.

I know this post is really harsh in places, but this is such an important thing for all artists, and there’s so many misconceptions about art theft online. And I feel like one of the biggest problems is that when some people see posts on art theft, they ignore them, because they think they’ve never done it or would never do it, so that’s why I worded this post the way I did. I’m not trying to hurt anyone–I just want people to understand what art theft is, how it affects us artists, and how you can avoid it. Thank you for reading.

[umbralsong]

This is the worst timeline. (x)

[umbralsong]

"Do you know what you did wrong?"

"Yes."

"What did you do wrong?"

"I should've broken his legs first so he couldn't run away."

[umbralsong]

This wedding scene between Liu Chang and Li Youzhen in Flourished Peony was INSANE and dare I say my favourite scene in the entire show.

This is after our haughty Liu Chang has had his leg broken by Prince Ning (father-in-law), been sold out by his own parents and had to agree to marrying in to the Princess’s household (rather than the standard she marrying into his) and cutting off his line.

Every part of this ultra grand procession is HUMILIATING to him as he plays the traditional bride’s part and you can see it on his face

The fact he is staggering along with a cane (gifted to him by Prince Ning) and the ceremony is like a bloody obstacle course had me screaming. This is so painfully good to watch.

Of course he agrees. But he’s so obviously a ticking time bomb about to go off. Prince Ning has some major hubris for thinking this won’t explode in his daughter’s face. A man gets more dangerous the less he has to lose and seeing as Liu Chang’s first act while returning to his maiden home is to kill and feed his parents their own dog….

This won’t end well.

A brilliant moment in the wedding is when they bow to a mirror and Liu Cheng can see how humiliated he is as he is submissive on the floor and she is standing.

And then the wedding ends with him taking the traditional bride’s position of going into the wedding chamber behind his husband/wife. And of course he politely concedes to her

Miles Wei gave a fantastic performance during this scene and I can’t wait for season two when he emerges as a villain. Now that he’s not holding himself to his internalised moral code and his parents are dead to him, he’s capable of anything.

[umbralsong]

I desperately want Wyll's pact with Mizora to make any sense

This would probably be hard to implement in-game, but I always thought his "devil" form should have been voluntary and a gradual transformation through his choices (I literally thought this was the angle at first but it's just a punishment agh).

Think a Hellfire Warlock, and activating his powers engulf and slowly shift his appearance. Sparing Karlach would activate this aspect of his contract. Desperation might make him more inclined to use it. Kind of like this [DAO mod with Sten]:

Mind you, if Zariel/Mizora's plan is to install him as Grand Duke of Baldur's Gate and use him, I fail to see what this accomplishes. I may have missed something, but until Wyll accepts being Grand Duke, the comments from Wyll and the companions indicate this would be largely unacceptable to most Baldurians.

[umbralsong]

The Iron Throne is bugged for me. I enter the submersible and it goes straight to the cutscene where it blows up, so I literally can't complete Wyll's quest in this save omg

Bonus: Ulder and Wyll both seem to think Wyll sold his soul to save them annnnd no. Mizora's deal always sounds shit to me. eta Oh, but Mizora recognizes that Wyll is free.

how are there more problems than I started with?

eta Wyll exclusive (after forcible transformation in this save) Portrait came back after changing locations. Testing the Iron Throne now. It works on my older save, but not my newer (four separate tests, restarting the game, and verifying game cache). It skips the Gortash cutscene and goes straight to the Iron Throne going boom.

I went to camp and had Minthara join me and Scratch and Hoot became hostile 😭😭😭

[umbralsong]

Why is it so difficult for Larian to just treat Wyll like an actual character?

I mean, seriously. He's an origin character. He's basically the prince of Baldur's Gate. His character arc and story is the most central to the main plot of the game. WHY is he treated like a side character? Why does his romance have less content and more bugs than HALSIN'S? Why is his entire story basically skippable? The first time I played BG3 I almost completely missed the fight with Ansur, because whenever I talked to Wyll, he never said a word about it.

Yes, he was basically completely rewritten right before the game left early access, and yes, he and lae'zel are the only origin characters who share a writer, but WHY does that mean that they're STILL incapable of giving him more content?

The way Larian bends to the will of fans for things like adding Halsin as a companion or letting you recruit Minthara without killing the tieflings (neither of which really make sense narratively) but completely ignore every single comment on their posts asking for more Wyll content is a HORRIBLE look for them, and I truly don't understand why they refuse to just LISTEN.

I would really like to be able to say that this isn't about racism. I really would. But I truly can't think of any other reason why they would dig their heels in this strongly. Wyll's voice actor is pretty active in the fandom, he's a literal knight in shining armor, he, Lae'zel, and durge are the most connected to the main story of the game, and he has so much potential with the whole 'monster hunter becomes a monster' thing.

The 8 patches in the years since BG3 released have added so much content, and so many huge story overhauls. I truly don't understand why photo mode and more subclasses have been given more priority over making a main character of the game actually functional, but it's been driving me insane for months now.

[umbralsong]

Anyway I think we should really give BG3 more credit for making one of its major antagonists, the Chosen champion of the god of tyranny, a smug tech bro pushing AI for law enforcement applications and lying about how it's produced and programmed.

[umbralsong]

I recruited Lae'zel and Minthara went and killed them

😭😭😭

I went to camp and had Minthara join me and Scratch and Hoot became hostile 😭😭😭