How is it possible that people don't understand that yes, a lot of artists dislike the idea of edits (sometimes terrible edits) of their work being posted around? That maybe doing so is pretty damn disrespectful to the artists and sometimes the commissioners?

Of course there's all sorts of contingencies, but still, Jesus Christ, you'd think asking should be a baseline rule of thumb when it comes to this.

TL;DR: someone wants added to the DNP list over this very issue.

I noticed that artists in general tend to have this really high level of insecurity, so it's not that uncommon to see people cry about how their artistic freedom is ruined when their pictures get edited, while pretty much everyone I know is completely fine to do Pokemorph or anything else like that, which doesn't ruin Game Freak's artistic freedom for this case, or something, probably an exception to the rule

As a very dedicated editor of other's art myself, I feel that I must say:

I always ask the original artist before making my edits, and I do my best to emulate the original artist's style as best as possible so it doesn't look so shoddy. Plus, credit is always given where it is due.

Now that said, I have been very disappointed at times when I really had a good idea or somebody wanted me to do a certain thing, either for comedic effect or otherwise, and an artist has said no.

Heck, at times I have even sent a message to an artist or two asking if I could do an edit of their work and then afterwards passed the time by doing said edit before I got an answer only to receive "no" as the answer after I had already made it, meaning I then could not post it anywhere after I had already made it. I had just simply wasted my time.

Yet, I do continue to respect the wishes of other artists, and so should everyone else.

Neitsuke said:
I noticed that artists in general tend to have this really high level of insecurity, so it's not that uncommon to see people cry about how their artistic freedom is ruined when their pictures get edited, while pretty much everyone I know is completely fine to do Pokemorph or anything else like that, which doesn't ruin Game Freak's artistic freedom for this case, or something, probably an exception to the rule

In this particular case, A major reason involved was that she kept finding art of her (VERY much lesbian) fursona edited with males.

Neitsuke said:
I noticed that artists in general tend to have this really high level of insecurity, so it's not that uncommon to see people cry about how their artistic freedom is ruined when their pictures get edited, while pretty much everyone I know is completely fine to do Pokemorph or anything else like that, which doesn't ruin Game Freak's artistic freedom for this case, or something, probably an exception to the rule

People can feel rather attached to their characters. I do wish the artist made the rule that only she is allowed to upload her art, but it doesn't harm anybody that none of it will be available here.

Neitsuke said:
I noticed that artists in general tend to have this really high level of insecurity, so it's not that uncommon to see people cry about how their artistic freedom is ruined when their pictures get edited, while pretty much everyone I know is completely fine to do Pokemorph or anything else like that, which doesn't ruin Game Freak's artistic freedom for this case, or something, probably an exception to the rule

Yeah, how dare she be bothered that her personal character* be made to behave in a way totally opposed to how both she and the character behave. She should just shut up and do our bidding without any consideration of her own beliefs.

/sarc

Being bothered is totally fine and normal, the issue is how they all get on the defensive every time something like this happens, like their personal life got threatened. People editing stuff are not shoving their "beliefs" on the original artist nor slaughter the original picture, but they act like their art and personality got vandalized.

It's a copy of a file of a picture, fictional stuff, and they act like their life got ruined to a personal level, which is my main issue here. Asking the edits to be removed would have been fine by me, maybe over reacting, but still okay, but the fact that person is in full defensive mode because of one edit and gets herself on DNP is really stupid

It's about who you are; their personal life did get threatened, because they invested personal meaning into that character.

This person's comment is accurate:

Holy crap, that's so terrible! Screwing around with someone's fursona is tantamount to attacking their soul.

I mean, dualism is astonishingly dumb, so lets just say 'identity' instead. But for a lot of people, art is like therapy. I think honestly, even for professional artists it's like that. There is a lot of you in the stuff you make, it's like a confessional. So this is a kind of betrayal, even if in some sense you could see it as ultimately an inevitable consequence of publishing your art.

Resolved, Vilani agreed to only have her Patreon content and any edits on the DNP list. We are allowed to keep everything else.

NotMeNotYou said:
Resolved, Vilani agreed to only have her Patreon content and any edits on the DNP list. We are allowed to keep everything else.

Patreon content is the other thing along edits I have seen popping up with DNP and takedown reasons, latest being anhes.

This is why you ask for permission first for any artist in regards to editing and altering their artwork in some way or form.

For example, I remember Doomthewolf had a few pieces of his male Renamon artwork edited by this one user on FA, and posted them on his gallery as if they were his own. I alongside a few other FA users quickly took note of this and informed Doomthewolf about this plagiarism. And long story short, that's why you see "Do NOT edit/alter my art" on his artwork since that incident.

They say imitation is the best form of flattery, but I beg to differ.

I dislike when artists get extremely upset that people edit their works or put their characters in situations that aren't canon... but those very same artists are perfectly fine editing the designs of copyrighted characters they didn't create, putting them in sexual situations that aren't canon, and even selling works using them for money.

"How dare you do a bigger-tits edit to this picture you don't own, of a character that I don't own, that I edited to have tits in the first place!"

It just strikes me as hypocritical to a large degree.

People should definitely mark their edits as edits right on the art though, preferably near the artist's original signature, so as to avoid people thinking the edit is the original work.

There is a big difference here with that example. Here the person traced/copied a work and uploaded it on his very own FA gallery. People who edit pictures usually don't do that to claim it as their own and surely don't upload them on their personal gallery unless they asked for the artist just for that, but these cases are more often sketches being colored rather than edits.

For both cases there isn't any form of imitation at all : First you have the usual person tracing/stealing a picture and claim as its own, and second someone changing a detail in a picture to fit his preferences, a modification not taking more than 10% of the picture, and not actually copying/taking inspiration from the whole picture.

Imitation would be to actually draw a picture from scratch and imitate a pose or an artist's style, not using a picture as a stencil or patch a modification on an existing picture