Free Figure Assets for Publication: A Component-Level Permission Audit
Work through a mixed-source figure, keep a small attribution ledger and spot the difference between free software and reusable artwork.
Free software and free artwork are different resources. A vector editor may be available without a subscription while an imported illustration still carries conditions. Publication review should follow each component of the final figure rather than the name of the tool that exported it.
Audit a mixed-source example
Imagine a kidney-disease overview containing a self-drawn organ outline, a downloaded cell icon, a published microscopy panel and three original arrows. The export is one PNG, but it has four kinds of source material.
| Component | What to record | Likely next action |
|---|---|---|
| Own organ drawing | Author and working master | Confirm it was independently drawn |
| Open-library cell | Creator, item URL, exact license | Add required credit and modification record |
| Published micrograph | Article, figure and rights holder | Check reuse terms or obtain permission |
| Own arrows and labels | Editable source | Confirm scientific wording |
This table is a review method, not permission for those example assets. Fill the rows with the actual item-level information.
Read the license attached to the asset
SciDraw's licensing page describes its attribution-based sharing approach. Bioicons exposes different license filters and item information. Do not assume every icon on an open site has identical terms. Preserve the license version, source and creator when downloading, because finding the same item later can be harder than saving a small record now.
For a Creative Commons asset, follow the relevant official license terms and identify modifications when required. A share-alike condition deserves specific review for an adapted work; “open” does not mean “no conditions.” If uncertain how terms apply to your composition, ask the responsible publisher or rights holder with the concrete item and use.
Write a usable attribution ledger
A practical row contains an asset ID, creator, source URL, license URL and modification note. Build the publication credit from those facts. For example, a template might read:
[Asset title] by [Creator], [source link], licensed under [license + link].
Modified: colors adjusted and labels replaced.
The brackets are placeholders, not a real attribution. Never invent a creator or replace the original source with the name of the editor used to assemble the figure. Keep the full ledger even if the publisher requests a shorter caption.
Avoid the “redraw to escape” shortcut
Tracing a restricted drawing, recoloring it or running it through a converter does not automatically make it independently created. If an asset is unsuitable, return to the underlying scientific concept and draw your own composition, or choose a properly licensed alternative. Preserve the brief and draft history so that the origin of the new work is clear.
Keep experimental imagery separate from decorative illustration. A simplified cell cartoon can explain a mechanism; it cannot substitute for evidence of a microscopy result. Label conceptual elements accordingly and retain the real data source.
Prepare the submission package
Make a final manifest listing the components, figure version and permission records. Export only after the figure's scientific reviewer has approved labels, relationships and data references. Check the destination journal's instructions independently: a source asset's reuse permission and a journal's acceptance rules answer different questions.
The FigEditor SVG Editor and Figure Layout can help inspect and assemble supported material, but they cannot grant rights over someone else's artwork. A free workflow is publication-ready only when its particular sources, final output and intended use have all been reviewed.