savageorange said:
Proportional to resolution.

More reason for artists to release high resolution files *rubs hands* :D

Pyke said:
Taking art and reselling it through something like Patreon is much different than someone using a picture you drew for furry roleplays.

Yes, but the examples given by AnotherDay are general enough that they could also include stealing.

CCoyote said:
You clearly aren't an artist.

Look, just because an artist makes something doesn't mean they made it for you to slap up on your desktop. That's your desire.

That is correct. I can't draw for shit. But that doesn't mean that I don't create things I care about.
But my take on it is that if somebody tells me "hey, I found your program and I'd like to use it for X, but detail Y makes it awkward in that regard", then I'd be happy to at least see what I can do and hopefully change that aspect. I wouldn't say "I didn't make this for you to do X with".
So I find it surprising that there is such a big difference in the way I think about my programs vs the way artists think about their art. I understand that not putting a watermark on an artwork puts it at higher risk of being stolen and that there is no direct equivalent for this in programming, but the above is not just in regards to watermarks. For example: In my experience artists don't like their art being edited to change an aspect, even if multiple people would like to see that change. I don't have a problem with people changing my programs at all. Quite the contrary.

So, yeah, I'm having a hard time understanding how artists think.

I would like to use this oppurtunity to direct attention to a question I have asked above

So going from "just in your head" to "public", at what point does it become a problem for the character owner?