Signature or link?

[Cayleen]

I think I'm overthinking this, but is there anything wrong with putting a link (or rather, the title of a website) on an image that is being shared digitally? Are there any social media platforms that have rules against this? I actually find it really handy when art I like has a way embedded in the art to connect back to the original artist, as that sometimes gets lost in the sharing. And a signature seems less informative than a website.

Am I spinning my wheels too hard here, lol?

This is what I'm thinking. Just super simple.

[Silversaeva]

I think adding a link could help people trace the image back to your website. I don't think a watermark would be the best idea as it obstructs the artwork. The only concern I have about a link at the bottom is that it is really easy to crop it out if a thief wanted to.

If you are planning on making a print or selling the image I think it would be a good idea to post it at a low resolution, so that people can see what it looks like, but can't steal it. People reposting free work without credit is rough, but I think it's at least comforting enough to know that they liked your work enough to repost it.