Am I stealing? Borrowing?....What did I do!?

[bearkub]

We have had a couple threads around recently dealing with the grey-area of stealing, borrowing, inspiration....etc of art from other people. I am starting this thread up in hopes of getting input from some of the more seasoned artists and questions from some of the newer people how to go about properly contacting a current artist or former artist for permission to use their work and where the lines are between theft, inspiration...on and on.


All comments must be civil and geared towards the discussion. Any finger pointing, accusational commentary, dragging up of old drama, etc will get your post deleted as well as gain you an infraction. This thread is meant to help those who think they did right yet get accused of theft and those who are wondering where the line really is.


Hope this gains some good discussion and please, STAY CIVIL.

[odium]

As an artist I've had shit loads of things stolen. One guy even took a mod I worked on, changed the logo, removed all our names from the credits and released it himself.

Its not fair when people take your work and don’t give a toss about you or any effort you might of put into it.

The amazing thing is I'm a very relaxed guy, and most of the time if somebody wants to use my work for something, I let them, provided they still "Thank" me in the readme some place.

But when you take somebody else’s work and don’t give a toss about the author, be in either in the mod scene or professional, you deserve to be laughed at and should be ashamed imo.

"IMO" don't ever use somebody else’s work unless you talk to them FIRST. Never ASSUME that the people will let you and always do your best to find out if its ok. If you cant get in touch, just forget about using it and look elsewhere.

Its better to be safe than sorry.

[Mark Dygert]

It's easier and less of a legal nightmare to make your own stuff from scratch. If you're going to use things like photos, take them yourself, or get them from VERY well documented sites.

When it comes to inspiration and reference I don't think its stealing to get ideas from other peoples work but the line is crossed at ctrl-c, ctrl-v. I think its all to easy to barrow "ideas" when dealing with characters and can be considered stealing much more easily.

With concern to environments I think its near impossible to detail things without consulting referance. Most of the time that kind of ref comes from real world objects and not really other artists work, unless you're looking to imiate a particular style.

So quick recap. viewing ref is ok, but never include it in your work. Don't knowingly copy another artist unless that is the goal. And CYA whenver possible.

[adam]

Meh, I'll rip photos for textures whenever I find one that is suitable. CGTextures, Flickr, Google Images, etc. I couldn't care less. I just make sure I make sweet 2D love to it enough that its no longer recognizable as the original photo. Simply ripping a photograph and slapping it in as a texture is lame & wrong. But fuckin' it right up to make your own is awesome & right*. :)

I've also been working from concepts I found online that are not my own, nor am I asking the artist for permission. If I were going to do it for financial gain I would definitely ask before making it, but as it stands its just for me to do some shit for my portfolio without having to waste time designing everything about what I want to make.

I do, however, suppose that brings up the issue of using concept artwork to better my portfolio. Which in turn is bettering my life if i get a new sweet job with the work I did. Since I used someone elses concept to do that work for my portfolio and land that job. To me, though, the artist was credited and I made it 'my own'. It's hardly ever a direct rip.

Good thread.

*IMO

[ebagg]

When it comes to this industry I think it inevitably bites you in the ass. Everyone knows a good amount of people, and if you're copying work while on a project it can have serious legal ramifications that you shouldn't mess with. If you can't alter something enough that it you can truly call it yours, you aren't worth a paycheck.

[Blaizer]

One of the reasons why i don't show many works, is because i have fear of plagiarism. From inspiration to plagiarism there is a very very short distance. The Internet is a very very bad place to show original things. People will copy what they like and they will imitate/plagiate the design doing it with their style. A sad reality. I personally hate to do what all people do, that's why i do "monsters" or "creatures".

What I mainly like to do, is to draw, and not modeling as many here may think. And due to my "fear", i don't show any image of my skeetch book, drawings, etc. I do not want they steal my ideas and designs.

Some works of mine were used as wallpapers in some cell phones portals without my permission (the plant i did is one of them). I quickly call them to remove my work. Are things that happens constantly, and are things we can't do much against them.

For textures, i always use my camera to grab photos. I use the internet and websites like pbase, for references. The textures found on the internet are not very original, they are used by too many people. I've seen the same texture used over and over again, and the same library models too.

[rolfness]

what are these infractions you speak of ??? will I have deformed children ?

[hobodactyl]

I understand that flat-out stealing an idea or even an entire piece is shitty, but Blaizer I don't understand not sharing a sketchbook because people may get ideas from you? I think if you're making anything worthwhile people can't really steal your stuff without it being obvious.

I guess if you're making something that just looks totally original and hasn't been seen before it could be a good idea to not show it off until you have enough to say "this is mine," but there are very few examples of that I'd say.

However, I'm not trying to defend people just stealing stuff flat-out; that's crap that people were just using your works as cell phone wallpapers without permission, but that's actually illegal.

It goes back to "it depends" in a lot of situations. I got the basic idea for the look of a comic I made from Sin City, but it looked significantly different. I also did some mock-ups of how it could look as a game, and they're all on my site. Recently that game "Mad World" was shown and it looks very similar to what I was thinking for the game, but I don't think they saw my site and thought "let's steal that idea!" And even if they did, they're doing a lot more with it than I have.

Just rambling mostly, but I think you shouldn't literally just steal people's work or parts of it, but otherwise if you're inspired by something then I don't think that's stealing it.

[Ferg]

It saddens me that someone wouldn't share their work for fear of it being stolen. Isn't that letting the terrorists win?

[Mark Dygert]

what are these infractions you speak of ??? will I have deformed children ? No, they would be the standard mutant spawnlings that you're accustomed to hatching. =P

It saddens me that someone wouldn't share their work for fear of it being stolen. Isn't that letting the terrorists win? hahaha that should be on a bumper sticker.

Bromel & Brown, you might want to be a touch more careful with the flickr/google images. Here we have to document what site it came from and who owns it before we can begin to manipulate it. For a while we had a house rule that if you could change it enough to be indistinguishable from the original we didn't need the documentation to back it up but that changed when we switched law firms (and someone asked). Personally I wouldn't ask and I'd just keep doing what you're doing, just don't slack it and start butchering things (I don't think its in your DNA).

If it really is indistinguishable then it shouldn't matter. But technically it does, and its the technicalities that people look to exploit when they're after large sums of money that's not actually theirs. Its the technical holes the business end looks to plug, whenever called upon... (so just don't call on them).

[Jeremy Lindstrom]

For an example: I would consider this stealing because the focal points of the piece are still blatantly copy pasta, but it's borderline because it's the eyes/mouth really the only things that you can pull, but it's still obvious where they came from.

Now if the author would have maybe taken 3 minutes and colored them in via PS instead of using the actual photo, it might have been able to make it his own..

I agree with Adam you need to make sweet 2d love to them pixels, you can tell if you made sweet 2d love or you just fucked it.

http://www.sketchmode.com/files/Rip.jpg

[stimpack]

Yup there is a line in stealing and refferencing. I personally just look and use ideas, but never directly copy and use. An idea is open and free, someones tangible work that they interprited the idea and put it down is owned by that person. I wouldnt steal your milk from your fridge, dont steal my models and textures from my galleries. That being said, I will gladely give my models and textures to just about anyone that asks. I have no problem sharing for the sake of learning....If the person wants my models to plop into a mod or what have you, then I have a problem.

I like what Adam said up there about using images, then making sweet sweet 2d love to them....mmmmmm love.

[StrangeFate]

What I mainly like to do, is to draw, and not modeling as many here may think. And due to my "fear", i don't show any image of my skeetch book, drawings, etc. I do not want they steal my ideas and designs.

We all get stolen from Blaizer, while it's terrible and all that, it's even worse to live in fear of it like you seem to do. That's a rather sad attitude.

Let them plagiarize, what are you afraid of, copies will always be cheap copies and never as good as the original and god knows potential retards have hundreds of other great artists to steal from already. And the people that matter WILL know who did what and where it comes from.


I think artists that really worry about being stolen from need to do their best to be contactable, putting an URL or email in your images etc. Just because an image is originally on your website which happens to contain your email address, doesn't mean that image wont end in 2367 other places on the internet ultimately making it hard to trace back to the author.
If your work gets still stolen for commercial purposes after this (there are bad people like that afterall) then just kindly as them to take it down.


As for borrowing, I think it has all been said again and again for years...

If you don't know, always try to contact the author first. Artists can be an overly sensitive lot and some will not see what you do as compliment.

If you get no reply, imo go ahead, give credit where credit is due, keep in mind the author might ask you to not use his work later. If he does so, no big deal, take the stuff down, if he's all pissed, tell him to chill and get a life. Hobby/fan/non commercial stuff isn't worth a change in anybody's blood pressure.

If you are an artist and the victim of plagiarism or straight stolen work, ask yourself if the whole issue is really worth any attention.
I've had stuff from my website layout and skins and textures 'stolen' and used in other crappy goth websites or mods often enough over the past years... that stuff is all so below my 'care' radar, not worth a thought.
My cat throws up regularly, now that's something that keeps me on my toes.

Ultimately, nothing is new in this world, we all draw inspiration, steal, plagiarize, idolize and borrow from somewhere and change and warp it to the muddy point we can tell ourselves we did something original. Where that muddy point or line is, varies for each one of us and again it varies with time and age. Best thing you can do is stay tolerant and openminded.


For commercial work, keep your hands off anybody else's work in general. Use it only for loose inspiration. You are not to make money of somebody else's work... that's simply not legal.

[Jeremy Wright]

My thoughts:

Is the ripped image necessary to create your piece?

If not, why use it at all?
If so, what does it matter how much it is resembled in the end if it was the catalyst that made your piece?

[Saidin311]

I've got a noobish question regarding basemeshes.

I'm not very good at modeling organic pieces, specifically human beings. However I've always wanted to take someones basemesh and sculpt it into something my own.

The question would be, is this condsidered a faux pa to include something like that in a portfolio or a website? I would include a note to credit the person with creating a basemesh or SDK. Also, to just make clear I wouldn't be useing basemeshes etc for any commercial work (should that ever come up).


Lastly, on my own personal note, I would hope that by the time I'm doing commercial work I would have the skills to make my own human basemeshes etc. But this was more of a general question because I see so many people use other peoples released bases.

[StrangeFate]

For a portfolio i'd put a picture of the basemesh itself, or if you modeled something off of someone else's concept then i would include a small version of the concept in your image too to give an idea of what you actually did or not.

I think it's save to say that if you used someone else's basemesh for portfolio work, your work isn't good enough yet to be in the portfolio.
I don't think there's a problem with using a basemesh to do things tho, it's fun to bring in a good mesh into lets say ZBrush and be able to go nuts on it.

We're talking about having harmless fun, so whatever's fun for you and doesn't hurt others is good enough :p

[Farfarer]

I'm not much of a concept artist, so I usually model from concepts that have already been created but I always concact the original artist and ask if it's alright if I plan to show it (if I'm just arsing around for practice, I don't tend to bother) and I always credit them where possible. No one I've asked has told me to get lost, yet.

I always try and stay away from being too greedy when taking "inspiration" for stuff I do myself, though. Not out of copyright fears, just out of the fact that I'd know the idea wasn't totally mine.

Textures... I try and stick to what I have available that's completely legal, but like Brome said, if there's a result on google image that's perfect, I'll nab it. It's always modified heavily but... that's not really an excuse, just covering tracks. On the other hand, if someone took a photo or texture I'd made and edited it and used it as an overlay or something, I'd be cool with that.

I've had meshes stolen a couple of times before - which in itself is odd because I'd hapily release most of them on the basis that there's a "thanks" or "original author" somewhere, if asked. An odd one that happened recently was a bust basemesh for sculpting I released turned up in it's original unsculpted form as someone's model. I was at a bit of a loss as to whether it was theft or not... the vertices had been pushed around but the mesh was mine and they were claiming it as their own. I had released the mesh with the intention that people would use it to sculpt with and create their own thing, but I guess that also left the option open to just flat-out steal the mesh. Thankfully, the mesh was ancient and it sucked, but it got me thinking about this sort of stuff at least.

My take is mostly that if someone steals your work or ideas without credit and benefits from it to get a job or something... they're gonna get found out and it will end up biting them in the arse.

[eriKa]

Does anyone know the legalities of using someone elses 2d character and putting a 3d model of it in your online portfolio?

It seems to me a lot of studios want to see that you can do work from someone elses concept. In this case I wanted to do a few characters from a european comic I'm a big fan of. I have TRIED to find out how to contact this person, and have been unable to so far.

There are several issues here. I want to use the characters to model off of, but only for my personal portfolio. I would give them full credit for design.

I want to include the concept art on the webpage with the model, but I believe it's illegal for me to place one of their images (either from a book or web) in a location that they did not approve.

If I found just the perfect image online, I doubt employers would really want to click back and forth between links to compare. I think there may be legal issues there as well.

I could just go find another artist to work off of, but there are many published artists that I would love to model in my portfolio.

Does anyone have more information about this kind of scenario?

[Josh_Singh]

DEVILS ADVOCATE:

So, here is my question, Dekard used the example of The Desforgeries guy, so where is the line between, "Inspired By" and Strait rip?
I did a quick Drawing to illustrate:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v139/nurbs_801/whereistheline.jpg
If he had done something like this, Would he have been reamed as hard?
It's obviously inspired by the Gladiator Image but, the pixels are fresh. Is this still Stealing?

[Rhinokey]

in a world where the bad was not existant and you used good as ref to make acceptable, then your acceptable would be good

but if the bad, was the orriginal and you did the acceptable one, then it would be close, and the acceptable would be bad.

hmmmm

[Josh_Singh]

Yes, I see what you mean.
Pretend the "BAD" example did not exist, rather the artist made the "ACCEPTABLE" image using the "GOOD" ref.
Is this Stealing?
The "BAD" image is obviously stealing because he simply smudged the existing pixels around and tried to profit from another's hard work.

[Smirnoffka]

Singh, my opinion is that if you used good as a ref for acceptable, then it is fine. If you used Bad as the ref it is fan art (as it is all original). Hell, every man and his dog has made a superman or wolverene. The thing that makes bad SO bad is that it copy>paste>manipulate>smudge. Still with the acceptable, I think you would have to give credit to the original (eg, inspired by good) but yeah, as long as you gave credit where credit was due, and wasn't making money off it then I don't really see the problem with that. But what would I know, I'm not a lawyer.

One thing that does show is how easy a person with talent can create something some quickly :D

[Eric Chadwick]

Josh this is somewhat in the gray area here. But I think this is just as acceptable as painting from someone else's photo, as long as you change the style & proportions to make it your own. Probably OK as far as legality goes. But I'd still call you on it, pretty unoriginal, same coloring.

I've also been working from concepts I found online that are not my own, nor am I asking the artist for permission. If I were going to do it for financial gain I would definitely ask before making it, but as it stands its just for me to do some shit for my portfolio without having to waste time designing everything about what I want to make.
But are you crediting the concept artist, or are you just leaving it up to the viewer to assume you came up with the design yourself? if so, that's unacceptable IMO.

[MoP]

Always credit others if you have used their work as direct reference (for example, making a 3d model as a direct translation of someone else's design).

[[MILES]]

http://blogs.amctv.com/scifi-scanner/images/2005_the_hitchhickers_guide_to_the_.jpg

If the Vogons were used as inspiration, (which looks to be the case from my perspective), that wouldn't be considered theft. But blatantly copying and pasting parts of the Gladiator render into his own art, is what makes the author's work "theft."

I believe that if a person can site a specific piece that inspired their work of art, then they should do so. If inspiration comes from a number of places that happened to have gotten squished around in their mind over time, (becoming one rather nasty mess of useful and useless gunk), then it would probably be fine to skip the details. I suspect that confident artists would be proud to site their inspiration (if there was one), rather than leave it up to speculation.

[rooster]

imo, if you did that then as long as you said 'inspired by blabla' then thats fine. if you just said 'i had this cool idea all by myself!' then thats a bit lame. still, wheres the line.. people have similar ideas all the time so it's possible you could create the acceptable without the original

[Ged]

I think the line is drawn by the individual who created the original artwork, therefore if you have any kind of conscience nagging at you saying "this is a lot like the that artists work" then you should either :

A:ask the original artist wether its alright to show this publicly
or
B: clearly give credit to the inspiration whenever you show the artwork publicly.

If you actually want to use any part of someone elses artwork(as a layer or copy/paste, etc) in your artwork then I think it should be a given that you try to ask permission to do that.

thats my take on the issue anyway.

[Eric Chadwick]

A:ask the original artist wether its alright to show this publicly
or
B: clearly give credit to the inspiration whenever you show the artwork publicly.

If you actually want to use any part of someone elses artwork(as a layer or copy/paste, etc) in your artwork then I think it should be a given that you try to ask permission to do that.

Doesn't help when they later decide to drag you to court. Professionals always get a release before incorporating someone else's work.

[Xenobond]

bummin thieves!

[almighty_gir]

my art teacher once told me

"all art is plagiarism, it's just down to you how far you go to cover it up... Now get the fuck out of my sight you cheating bastard!"

[corrosion]

I agree that 'all art is plagiarism'!
I heard another quote once that is really good and it goes: "real creativity is covering up all your sources!"
C'mon peeps, everybody here is influenced by all sorts of pop culture.. in many artists the influences are so obvious.. but it's those artists that can cover up all their influences and make something 'unique' that makes everybody go WOW!

I think that anytime you use somebody else's work as a starting point, or as a 3d modeller you use pre-existing concept art you should mention where you get them from. Not mentioning where you took the art from and non-chalantly waiting until somebody points it out is lame. Be honorable!

[Jeremy Lindstrom]

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Albert Einstein

[Emil Mujanovic]

DEVILS ADVOCATE:

So, here is my question, Dekard used the example of The Desforgeries guy, so where is the line between, "Inspired By" and Strait rip?
I did a quick Drawing to illustrate:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v139/nurbs_801/whereistheline.jpg
If he had done something like this, Would he have been reamed as hard?
It's obviously inspired by the Gladiator Image but, the pixels are fresh. Is this still Stealing?

If the BAD didn't exist, then your version would have been acceptable from a design point of view, its almost like you've designed another creature from the same universe/race.
At the end of the day, you didn't entirely rip off the guy, you just used the same skin tones and its different enough to call your own. Maybe a bit of hue shifting here and there might differentiate it enough to further separate it from the original.

But if it came down to the BAD and the ACCEPTABLE? images, the ACCEPTABLE? image would be far more acceptable in my opinion. The fact that it was painted from scratch and it looks significantly different from the original.

-caseyjones

[corrosion]

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Albert Einstein

hey Dekard, thanks for finding that one... I knew it was a famous one.. and obviously, better said than what I remembered of it! :)

[Blaizer]

In the ACCEPTABLE remains the same "design lines" and forms, so for me is not all acceptable. Lacks of originality, imagination, creativity, self-esteem, it's like i grabbed a picture and i deformed it, like a face caricature. That's like modifiying the work of another person to get something SIMILAR.

To take the idea from other person because we are useless to use our imagination is very bad. Can you be proud of making yours something not yours? because you modified it a bit? that's terrible!!

I would never copy/steal something not mine, it's a matter of pride. To create is more fun than steal, you close your eyes and you work in your mind :).

The fear to be "plagiated" is something very complex to explain. There are too many good artists in this world to be afraid of :D (many without morality and without mercy :)). And if you post a work in a forum, the few ones that will credit the work as yours, are the people who visit that forum. If you are not familiar in that community, they won't care about your nick/name too. Normal people ignores who did this or that work, and of course the name behind it. This was commented here days ago and i said i always take attention to names.

One funny thing i have been said on CGTalk 2 times, is what i copied myself, with people posting saved images and saying "you copy the person who did this". They don't care about names, and for the same rule, they also don't care about making something similar because they think people don't know the original artist. In all the years with internet connection, i have seen terrible things about plagiarism and people using the work of others to get a job or simplily to accelerate their work and get paid.

I hope you understand my fear :D, i think is very justified.

All not is plagiarism, original ideas exists and fresh and new ideas always appears. There are always people who use the same ideas and perfect them, or making new ideas from oldest ideas.

we are so influenced by what has already been created, that we don't use imagination and we tend to do similar things of what we like. "We only see with our eyes and not with our mind, artists should see with their mind too", this is something i have been said since i was a child. We have now a bad joke saying: "you are not chinese, don't copy".

To Mix is what almost all people do.

Take as example the USA comics, almost all are SUPER heroes (the result of a society with fears, they need heroes!), same idea with different/similar designs or forms and with lycra dresses ^^, too many animals associated to men with super powers (bat-man is a mix example). Greeks mixed a lot in their culture falling i what i consider like ridiculous. With all this i come to say that there are only a few that are original, and if I have the fear of being copied, it is quite justified. I think i have my own original ideas and i have my fears, very normal. That is sad... yes, but it can't be helped. Bad experiences makes you to protect yourself in excess.

I wrote too much heh, ignore my bad grammar please :P

cheers

[Mezz]

So basically...

There are no new ideas out there. Deal.
Any author or writer (good ones, anyway) should and will tell you that there are no new stories, just the same ones with new characters and places and such. I don't remember who, but one authour narrowed it down to there existing only 6 possible stories. Another author (a more bitter one, I guess) said there's only 1.
My point is that this applies to art too. No, you will never come up with something that hasn't been done before. What's important is how you make what HAS been done before somehow interesting and seemingly unique. Making another space marine? It's been done, but if you find a way to add elements that are very UNIQUE and make it look like something people think they've never seen before, than good job! That's a succesful design of something that's already 'been done'.

As for this relating to plagarism, yes, whether you realize it or not, you ARE going to steal from other artists when creating your work. It can either be conscious or subconscious, but it'll happen. What you must do is be aware of this and think how, "Ok, so I know that *this* inspired me, but how can I make it something from *this* but much more?"

The negative of this is if you blatantly rip elements off of other people's work and don't change and grow from the design so it's obvious that you just stole away. This is bad, and yes, I believe it will come back to you one day, and as already said, 'bite you in the arse'.

So keep looking at other artist's work and keep stealing away. But you had better make sure to steal in a damn unique and inspiring way!!

(p.s. Sorry for the wall of text :P Anyone still with me...?)

[hawken]

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." - Albert Einstein

he's right.

the Designers Republic (they did the graphics on wipeout for those not in the know, and many other things besides) say:

"shit copies, tallent borrows, genius steals".

A good creator never releases his sources, but it's always best to build upon something with only the idea in mind, not use the actual material. Using someone elses materials blatantly for me is theft and un-acceptable, also if you get found out -- !

[SouL]

There's a distinction between manipulating actual artwork and stealing an idea. But I think identifying the 2 is down to personal interpretation.

To me the "acceptable?" image is fine. A little too inspired by the original image (I understand the point being made, though), but fine.
The "bad" image is unacceptable from the point of view that I can still clearly see the sourced artwork, the inconsistency of the fidelity of the pixels, and so on. At the same time, though, I can see how someone with little to no art background might not be able to notice the inconsistencies mentioned and see it as original, inspired by, or the stealing of an existing idea.

Personally, "bad" is manipulating existing artwork. You get no points in my book. That's theft to me.

If the "good" image was indeed inspired by the Vogons, that's acceptable. He stole an idea. As I'm sure did the original concept artist behind the Vogon design.

The truth is that everyone steals an idea from somewhere. The key is to do a good enough job to not reveal your source.

[Thegodzero]

Bad is a paint over of good plain and simple.
Acceptable with out bad, is fine as it only used the idea from good.
Acceptable with bad existing is a pint over/fan art of bad.

Beyond that example the basic principles still are true.
For textures using photos/textures as your base and changing minority(clone stamp/healing brush and hue shifting) it so that it better fits your needs is still ripping it off. Using other peoples photos/textures as overlays on something you created is fine as long as none of the individual overlayed textures are easily noticed for what they are.

[Blaizer]

There are 2 possible kind of sources here:

-The Reality, what we see.
-And the work of others, what we like. <---

The source is always apparent, you can't hide it when is quite obvious. Games tend to copy reality, Do the artists steal things from reality? copy, borrow, steal... is practically the same with different words. What i see very bad is to get "inspiration" from others, copying it or borrowing it, call it whatever you want.

There could be a third one, another source that surely is ignored, it's the world inside your mind with its machinery. That's what we call imagination (have you got your imagination dead?). Anyone have surreal ideas? have you ever dreamed something like real, but not present in reality? can you imagine a different form of life, a new alien, different from all the stuff created?

Only non creative persons say that "everyone steals ideas from somewhere", and i'm totally disagree. I can give form to my ideas into my head without taking a shit from reality or from others, like mud. If the unique thing you can do is to "steal" from others, that does not mean that there aren't people who can create without stealing. It's like to say: "it's impossible for me, so for all people too! because we are all humans".

Look at giger... or look the predators, are they original? unique? the creator, Did he steal the idea from someone? from somewhere? did he hide the source? i don't think so, because a predator is basically a human with an ugly face, with a haircut present on humans too. The source is in the imagination of the creator. Alien is a good example of a "world inside" a creative mind.

The truth for all of us, is always what we like to see/think. I don't steal from anyone, that's my truth. Think what you want :D

[hawken]

T

Only non creative persons say that "everyone steals ideas from somewhere", and i'm totally disagree.

Look at giger...

don't be silly. Everyone does steal ideas from somewhere. Yeah OK it's different from game assets that are meant to be realistic, but people like giger are inspired by the human form, he's basically "stealing" from nature. Another word would be inspiration.

So what you are saying is "only non creative persons say that they are inspired by the environment around them". Well, that doesn't make any sense does it?

Stealing ideas and working them into the fold is almost the same as being inspired by something. In fact, it probably IS the same thing.

[perna]

Yup.

As human beings we are unable to create anything new, but we can be good at "creatively" combining existing information.

Blaizer, if you didn't "steal", you'd still be drawing crude stickmen at best. All your skill in lines, form and color rests on the hard work of other people through thousands of years.

You've learned all you know from other artists, and now you're saying that you're unwilling to contribute to that pool, that you are only going to take, and not share. I like your work and you seem like a nice guy, but give this some though. I'd claim you are the one being unethical here.

[almighty_gir]

There are 2 possible kind of sources here:

-The Reality, what we see.
-And the work of others, what we like. <---

The source is always apparent, you can't hide it when is quite obvious. Games tend to copy reality, Do the artists steal things from reality? copy, borrow, steal... is practically the same with different words. What i see very bad is to get "inspiration" from others, copying it or borrowing it, call it whatever you want.

There could be a third one, another source that surely is ignored, it's the world inside your mind with its machinery. That's what we call imagination (have you got your imagination dead?). Anyone have surreal ideas? have you ever dreamed something like real, but not present in reality? can you imagine a different form of life, a new alien, different from all the stuff created?

Only non creative persons say that "everyone steals ideas from somewhere", and i'm totally disagree. I can give form to my ideas into my head without taking a shit from reality or from others, like mud. If the unique thing you can do is to "steal" from others, that does not mean that there aren't people who can create without stealing. It's like to say: "it's impossible for me, so for all people too! because we are all humans".

Look at giger... or look the predators, are they original? unique? the creator, Did he steal the idea from someone? from somewhere? did he hide the source? i don't think so, because a predator is basically a human with an ugly face, with a haircut present on humans too. The source is in the imagination of the creator. Alien is a good example of a "world inside" a creative mind.

The truth for all of us, is always what we like to see/think. I don't steal from anyone, that's my truth. Think what you want :D


yeah, look at giger...

"His paintings often display fetishistic sexual imagery. His main influences were painters Ernst Fuchs and Salvador Dalí."

Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._R._Giger#Style)

[Sandbag]

everyone is able to observe nature, you cant steal what is given freely. There is no artist that painted the flora and fauna that surround us (I would say "stealing from god" is a pretty silly thought to try and place on this). When an artist looks at nature and changes it, it is no longer nature, it is that artist's design and now you're stealing someone else's idea.

I can see where Blaizer is coming from and find disappointingly unsurprising that it is upsetting people. People are so quick to defend an action that they do themselves, and yet will condemn it when someone does it in a way that offends them. It is almost like saying "well I only stole a tv, you stole from a bank!" To anyone against stealing, it shouldn't matter, theft is theft.

Many people believe that imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, but when ideas and original high quality artwork make your paycheck imitation suddenly becomes a threat to your lively hood.

I do agree that no one is above being influenced by other artists though, it is impossible to look at art and not be even subconsciously influenced by it. It is another thing entirely though to have another piece of work open while working on your own for direct reference to their design. I do think an artist can learn a great deal by using other art as reference (though it can be quite dangerous, you wouldn't want to replicate any mistakes that artist made and learn bad habits). "How do other people paint water?" "how does xxxx model hands, they always look and deform well" "what are the details that make his/her art look so finished and how can I apply those types of details to my work?" These are significantly different to "what is the color, skin tone, facial structure, and appearance for an alien that I can use to create another alien."

[Blaizer]

don't be silly. Everyone does steal ideas from somewhere. Yeah OK it's different from game assets that are meant to be realistic, but people like giger are inspired by the human form, he's basically "stealing" from nature. Another word would be inspiration.


That's your point of view hawken. To know how works our world and take elements from it, for me is not to steal. It's like to make food using ingredients, to cook ideas in our mind. Other thing is to STEAL ideas from others, and this is what we are talking about.

Non creative persons seems to don't have the ability "to cook". For that reason they steal others ideas because the think they stole to nature... They lacks of pride IMHO.

You've learned all you know from other artistsi've learned all i know alone, i'm autodidact, i have never gone to an art school, and the unique influence i have had, was nature documentals. One of the things i read/watch, are a few mangas/animes and all are with girls now :P.

I didn't know who was giger till i had internet...

Someone needed a teacher, or copy artists, to know how to use a pencil? don't think so... since i was a child i was always painting walls in my house.

The few artists i know are from manga, like Dragon Ball (Akira toriyama), Video girl Ai (Mazakazu katsura), Saint Seiya, Gundam, Slayers, etc. I grew up watching a few animes and a lot of nature documentals, and i think i'm zero influenced by anime.

Being humans, we create new forms and designs, we make new ideas and we shape our world, just see cities (Barcelona, Sagrada Familia, Gaudí). Just look at industrial designs and mechanics. Planes, cars, ships, etc. there are always new and cooler models taking a "base mesh" as source :)

With this i'm not going to convince anybody. It's only my different point of view. If you call me "silly", and think "Everyone does steal ideas from somewhere", that's your truth, your point of view, your way to see things, not mine :). As artist, i really dislike a lot to be said, "where did you steal your idea?" sounds terrible, and it sounds like a question from an envious person without "ability to cook". It's like they were resting value to your work, and then i say... why share things with this kind of persons? it's a non sense when they offend you with such ugly comments.

It's nice to show what you do to some friends you know they won't steal your ideas, people with honor and pride. This is the internet :P, and you can't show all what you have.

People are so quick to defend an action that they do themselves, and yet will condemn it when someone does it in a way that offends themIn my country we say: "the thief believes that all people have his same condition/status". To have a different point of view always result as offensive :(

cheers

[Jeremy Wright]

Influence/reference are not equal to stealing. Anyone who thinks they are should re-evaluate their practices. Maybe it's a broad, grey line that seperates them, but the line is there.

Saying that Giger was influenced by Dali, doesn't mean he copied his paintings. Emulation is not imitation. Absorption is not appropriation. I'm disappointed in the general attitude of this thread and the Blazier-bashing.

[Tully]

I'd say Singh has it pretty well down. Inspiration is not the same thing as plagarism. If we weren't allowed to have influences, nobody would ever do anything.

There is such a thing as going too far -- generally if it's close enough that a knowledgable person can pin the inspiration it to one specific piece of somebody else's work then it's too much. Or if you can tell that they've copied/copypasted/reused any part of another person's work (that you can tell is the important bit). If a knowledgable person can pin elements in your work that are consistant with the general style or themes of another artist's work and you're also adding enough of yourself or from other sources, you're probably in the clear.

Personally, I thought bits of the underground cavern/temple/thing at the end of Hellboy II was in dangerous territory with the extent to which it referenced the work of Zdzislaw Beksinski. I could point to one or two of his paintings were basically identical to some of the motifs they used, but I doubt anybody will sue.

On the other hand, if I like Phil Hale's paintings and I decide I want to do a painting of a man who is extremely anatomically correct with a very wirey/veiny body and with a strong directional lightsource -- that's pretty likely to be just fine. However, if I put that man flying through a blue/green air about to attack a black robot monster (http://www.allenspiegelfinearts.com/hale_poster.jpg)-- that's pushing it.

Where it goes from a mere credibility/creativity issue into a legal one is pretty sketchy to say the least.

[perna]

i've learned all i know alone

I don't want to sound argumentative (omg god forbid), but you didn't... and that's a definite fact.

Countless generations of artists have laid down the path for you so you can do what you do today, and you want to take all credit for it. I've never known an artist to make such a claim, it's quite disrespectful to a legacy that makes any of us pale into insignificance.

If you learned everything "alone", why is your style so very late 20th century? Pure coincidence?

You have some art skills, now you need to look a bit into the history of your craft and realize how it would take tens or hundreds of thousands of years for you to develop your current skillset if all you had to learn from was "nature". There are countless art principles that you take for granted now that were developed over generations and generations of artists working their ass off. You didn't invent those things, you learned them from other artists.

I've learned everything I know about art from other artists. I wonder if there are anyone else here that would say differently besides you, Blaizer.

[Blaizer]

Perna, i don't know that path you talk about, i'm disconnected from tendencies or styles. More from History.

What i only know is that i got some tools like pencils and rubbers and i do an use of them to express myself on a paper, to give form to my ideas. With computers the same, i use tools with my style to give volume to my concepts.

Surely there is someone that thinks like me. This world is huge and there are too many religions... heh

now you need to look a bit into the history of your craftI grew watching Anime and nature documentals, i answered that. Nature is the best source of inspiration for me. Spain is a country without a comic culture or entertainment culture. Traditional artists like Velasquez don't inspire me. I just do the things in my way, giving my style.

Do you know Masamune shirow? Apple Seed, he takes inspiration from nature as he told in an interview, like insects. As him, i do the same, nature.

Those who are influenced by other artists do not have style. However, those who do not get influenced, creates a style of its own, identifiable by anyone. Everyone knows that a job is yours with just seeing the image.

Akira Toriyama for example has its own style, his way of seeing the world is different to anyone. One of the few things that defines an artist, is the style.

Things turned out like a bit personal. I don't want to be the center of discussion LOL

[Ferg]

Those who are influenced by other artists do not have style.

Wow.

[EarthQuake]

Wow.

Yeah, wow. That has to be one of the most foolishly arrogant statements i've seen posted on these forums, and that is saying quite a lot.

[Justin Meisse]

You can't look at anything without getting influenced by it. Your art is good Blazier but I see the influences behind your work even if you don't realize it yourself.

[Joseph Silverman]

Observing light, shadow, value, color, line work and methods of shading, various applications of artistic mediums -- all of these were developed over thousands of years. Unless you discovered some magic new way to create images on paper, blazier, you did not learn art independent of everyone else. The groundwork for every thing you do -- your very notion of 'art', was set by every artist known in history.

[almighty_gir]

Traditional artists like Velasquez don't inspire me. I just do the things in my way, giving my style.


so, you want your art direction to be different from Velasquez? meaning it has been influenced by him in a "negative" way.

influence and inspiration come in so many forms, everyone wants to set their own trend, to forge a new path, and would love to make the whole art world turn round and say "WOAH THAT'S COOL!!!". but even the people who have the ability to do that, are influenced by others.

[adam]

Blaizer?

[StJoris]

I very much stand by what I think Jo Coenen once told me, he said to be a good designer you need to read the newspaper, look at other people's designs, and then do something else. Every piece of art does not stand on it's own but is part of the time sense, the art that is being made at that era and the marks of what has been before.
It's very evident in architecture, I would say much more than in fine art. By analysing existing designs you can gain insight into what "design-steps" they took, and that you can take as "design-baggage" with every design you make. There is also transformation, it is not uncommon to purposefully reference to something by for example transform to their rhythm of grid.
Firmly believe in "making something your own", ea take the design principles that artist used and see what you can come up with following those design principles, but totally not necessarily having the same look.
About that, direct visual inspiration for me, is totally overrated. I think it's a good to find inspiration in other fields, like the rhythm of a bach-play, or it's musical notation. Anything can be inspiration, the more you can transform that from not so related fields, the merrier.
That said, I would consider the ACCEPTABLE to be unacceptable, it blatantly follows only the look, without actively thinking about the design.

[Blaizer]

Heh, i'm influenced by flies, bees, reptiles...

I love insects.

You can't look at anything without getting influenced by it. Your art is good Blazier but I see the influences behind your work even if you don't realize it yourself.Your are right in part, but if you dislike something a lot, if you hate it, you w0n't be influenced by them. We only get influenced by the things we like. I like nature and i mix what i like from it.

LOL, you know me better than i do myself.

Please, don't take things out of context, i'm seeing like some of you are misunderstanding them.

Blaizer?
yes sir? you edited your post! i make you LOL right? hehehe

[BoBo_the_seal]

I'm influenced by everything and everyone. It’s my interpretation of those influences that makes my art unique to me.

I don’t have all of the answers, but that’s ok, I know that others have faced the same issues and they may be able to fill in the gaps for me. It would be silly of me not to learn from their experiences as I hope others can learn from mine. I feel that I would become stagnate if I didn’t allow myself to dip into the creative pool of others and be influenced.

- BoBo

[Jeremy Wright]

Your are right in part, but if you dislike something a lot, if you hate it, you w0n't be influenced by them. We only get influenced by the things we like. I like nature and i mix what i like from it.

Man, I have to disagree with you there. I hate Rob Liefeld and Greg Land so much that I want my art to look absolutley nothing like there's. Therefore, I try to study anatomy as much as I can, I don't allow myself to hide scene components I can't draw (like feet), and I don't trace porn actors.

Joking aside, negative influences do count. They can contribute just as much to who we are as positive influence.

[Mark Dygert]

Your are right in part, but if you dislike something a lot, if you hate it, you w0n't be influenced by them. We only get influenced by the things we like. I like nature and i mix what i like from it.
You are inspired by the things you like. You can still be negatively influenced by things you hate.

I like BoBo's analogy about dipping into the creative pool of others and allowing yourself to be influenced and inspired by their work. The line is crossed when you take a bucket along with your trunks down to the pool.

The people who bring a pale to the pool normally leave something else behind...

[Justin Meisse]

well crud, this turned into exactly what bearkub didn't want

[bearkub]

Well, it's sorta still on topic.....I suppose. Carry on, lads, carry on.

[Target_Renegade]

Sandbag has a good point, there is, sitting there with an image of another person's work and drawing direct influence from it, and theres sitting there with no other image of someone's work but thinking about another person's(s) style and drawing from blank.

[Josh_Singh]

Hey so to change the topic a bit to something more in line, So have you guys ever heard the saying "If you change it 20% or more it's yours." total crap imo, but surprisingly I have heard it said in more than 2 studios.
Any thoughts on that?

[Farfarer]

I'd say it's the opposite, if there's more than 20% remaining, you're stealing.

And I'd say 20% is pretty damn generous, depending on what it is.



The flipside to that might be... you make a model for a game. Later on that model has to be changed a bit and someone else does it. Is the model still yours to claim creatorship?

[Rox]

Kinda hard to measure change in percent, though. From a pure technical standpoint, I could drag an image into Photoshop and drag two sliders and no pixels are the same as they were before - but the human eye can see it's still the same image, only warped. If I draw a 2D image of a 3D model someone else made, then the image is all mine, 100% original, even if it's someone else's design. How do you measure, in percent, how much "the same" a design is?

You can't. Similarly, imagine grabbing a model someone made and retexturing it completely. It's no longer the same character and a huge part of the visual aspect was made by you. How many percent of the outcome is yours? What if you take someone else's texture sheet and maps one of your characters or objects to match it? You made the model all by yourself. How many percent is that?

In a perfect world I'd decide that IF you know you've been influenced by another specific product, then you'll go out of your way to mention that and credit the creator of it. And no one would use any material that's not their own without permission. 'Course, that's never going to happen.

[hobodactyl]

There are too many things to respond to, so I just want to throw in my two cents :P

I think it's sad that it's so easy to just literally steal other people's work nowadays (I mean like copy and paste or tracing). This is just stealing, so I don't think anyone is in disagreement about that.

However, you can look at a lot of the great masters, like Peter Paul Rubens, and consider things like this (from his wikipedia article):
"There, he studied classical Greek and Roman art and copied works of the Italian masters."

I don't think you are a bad artist even if you are directly copying someone else's work, but know that that's what you're doing and you're doing it to learn.

All I can think of is that the big stink is coming from, as I see it, Blaizer saying that he's more creative than a lot of people because he is "drawing from his imagination/nature" rather than using other people's ideas. Which is his point of view, but clearly we don't all agree that creativity is bound to what you do with forms not informed by man-made creations.

I think we're also delving into strange territory because we should make the distinction that Video Games are primarily Commercial Art; many of us are trying to get jobs in the industry or already are in the industry and enjoy seeing what we can come up with that would still make sense in the context of a game. Sure I have crazy spirally dreams and whatnot, and I make paintings of stuff like that sometimes, but this community is primarily focused on the commercial art of creating video games that people can connect with, and to that extent I think what Blaizer was saying about "games copying reality" makes sense; we are often trying to copy reality in game art.

Blaizer: I don't want to bash on you, because I would say you are a better artist than I am, but I think for virtually every piece on your site I can see either a purposeful or indirect influence from other artists that were most likely before you. So I'm not trying to attack you, but it's hard to stay impartial when you're basically saying virtually every artist isn't creative, and yet I don't see anything you've made that's reflective of that mentality.

I think I was trying to head somewhere with all this, but I'm tired and hopefully some of it makes sense :P

EDIT: In RE to the 20% thing, that's kinda what I'm driving at; if you're making a road texture, we're doing commercial art, so who cares if you get a road texture (as long as you either have the rights to it or credit the owner), if it looks right in game I don't think you should have to hand-draw every pixel of a 2048 Gears of War-style road from your mind because that's the "creative" thing to do.

[East]

Hey so to change the topic a bit to something more in line, So have you guys ever heard the saying "If you change it 20% or more it's yours." total crap imo, but surprisingly I have heard it said in more than 2 studios.
Any thoughts on that?
Yeah. Someone pulled an arbitrary number out of their ass.

Now stop trying to change the topic. This thread was interesting/entertaining to follow up until this point :poly124:

[rooster]

every new big personal project I start I get a whole bunch of reference material (photos and other peoples concepts) and chuck it in a folder, and blitz through it, 1 seond for one image. and it all merges together and gives me ideas. i think thats fine. as long as I put enough images in there. I reckon if I just had a couple or lots the same then I'd rip someone off without even meaning to.

[Eric Chadwick]

... you make a model for a game. Later on that model has to be changed a bit and someone else does it. Is the model still yours to claim creatorship?

You never owned it, the company owns it. Unless you're a modder of course.

[rube]

well technically he's talking about creating something, not owning it.. and in my case in those situations I would (and have) put the version I created in my portfolio.

[rooster]

that issue is quite close to the whole credit discussion.. what if you make something, leave, and someone else remakes it? would the person who remakes it have done it differently without your base? does that count as influence? meh

[hobodactyl]

My last post was probably too verbose, but I think this is what we're talking about with commercial art. This is entirely different than say making a painting that is trying to evoke an emotion; generally we are making things that become the property of a company so really they can do whatever they want and say whoever did it that they want, even though that sucks that's what they're paying you for :P

Particularly in the context of making art for a game company, I mean how is this different than if a graphic designer comes up with a really slick layout for a magazine, then goes on to another magazine; the previous magazine can keep that layout, and probably a new designer will come along and change it some. The guy that came up with it was creative, but maybe the next guy made it even better. Does that make one of them better than the other?

[Blaizer]

...Blaizer saying that he's more creative than a lot of people because he is "drawing from his imagination/nature" rather than using other people's ideas

hobodactyl, i don't say that man, you have misunderstood what i said. I'm not more creative than a lot of people, that's a bad conclusion.

What i've been saying is what an artist is more creative if he/she uses IMAGINATION and if he/she don't copy/steal/borrow. That's all, and it's a simple opinion that should not offend anyone.

[hobodactyl]

Sorry man, I definitely misunderstood! I totally agree with you there, I see what you're trying to say now.

[Rob Galanakis]

People are so quick to defend an action that they do themselves, and yet will condemn it when someone does it in a way that offends them. It is almost like saying "well I only stole a tv, you stole from a bank!" To anyone against stealing, it shouldn't matter, theft is theft.

Stealing a tv IS different than robbing a bank. There are degrees here, and people perceive the degrees differently. Is this perception a result of self-justification? Perhaps sometimes but not always- and in the most important ways, not at all. The people that make exceptions for their behavior generally are found out and their opinions will not hold up. But anyway...

How do I feel about stealing? I give away for free practically everything I can, even if it costs me time and money to do so. There'd be less stealing if people gave more away or cared about it less (see? It is relative. If people don't care about stealing, who will care about stealing?). How many of us upload our personal projects, models, animations, etc., for use by others? Well, why not? What good is it on your HDD, sitting there. Wouldn't you be happier if someone took it and made something cool with it, if it helped someone along as a game developer?

It is safer to ask for credit, especially when you are almost sure it will be given. But if you ask, and it is denied, you shouldn't use it. If you use it without permission and get called on it, your chance is probably worse that you will be allowed to use it than if you asked, but you may not be caught. So it is a tradeoff- stealing is a gamble and only do it if you are aware of the risks.

[Ruz]

When I was a graphic design student there was this guy called james who literally would steal your ideas and he would even boast about it.

It used to really irk me as he was quite a good artist but that was just laziness or perhaps he just enjoyed trying to wind up people and 'get away with it' as he saw it.

He really crossed the line I feel, because his intent was to steal.

BUT he was probably doing what most magazine editors do, ie stealing ideas from the competition, but not perhaps so blatantly

I think its all about intent - we are all influenced by other peoples work , myself included, but I

would like to think that I have a different take on a given subject, even if its a subtle

difference.

I think we all know instinctively when the line has been crossed re plagiarism and TBH a little common sense goes a long way.

[pior]

Blaizer I think you misphrased many of your statements, leading to more and more confusion. Also, I must say that

"Those who are influenced by other artists do not have style"
really is utter bullshit.

So Frazetta has no style huh? However if you look carefully he definitely learned alot from Bridgman. Yet you can't deny that F has is very own vibe.

One shall keep in mind that there is *growing as an artist* one one hand and *making an art piece* on the other hand .Two different processes.

Of course one needs to rely on imagination to reach a thing of his own - no point of doing art if there is no inner drive.

However to grow as an artist you ALSO need to study. That does not mean that the final piece needs to be a straight copy of whatever michelangelo biceps or cool looking hand. It's just that art studies is a tool to understand things you would miss otherwise. Like how shapes merge in and out, aso. That way next time you make a hand, you remember how it works.

Like when you went to school. Do you think you would be able to do basic maths if no one showed you the tools? Same goes for language. Some guys centuries ago decided to take babies away from their moms in order to prove that human beings would naturally speak latin if let on their own. IIRC the guinea pigs babies diedm, or something.

I would say, be careful with your statements. I know you are expressing something personnal but it turns out to be very offensive.

Also I could take your art as a counter example. I like your monsters, but I noticed a few times that artists commented on them by saying 'hey didnt you do the same model already?'

That doesn't mean those are bad models - it just means you need to expand your area of studies to express yourself even better when crafting cool monsters. I know I suffer from similar problems in many areas - be it anatomy, facial rendering, aso. Yet, being aware of such mistakes is what makes the artist's journey so fascinating to me. There is always room for improvement, better skills to learn, other craftmen to look up to. So one is never really stuck. EXCEPT... if one does the same thing over again from imagination.

I agree with Ruz - commonsense goes a long way. It's too bad that some guys copycat other pictures from the internet. They don't know all the great satisfying lerning challenges they are missing by doing so. Too bad for them.

[Jeremy Wright]

Stealing a tv IS different than robbing a bank.

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i155/8FtSpider/Misc/Maybe_Worse.jpg

[hawken]

It's only theft if you believe in ownership, which is just a concept we all agree on in modern society.

Being a Navajo native living in pre-Columbus north America, I have no concept of ownership and property.

[hawken]

Non creative persons seems to don't have the ability "to cook". For that reason they steal others ideas because the think they stole to nature... They lacks of pride IMHO.


painting by numbers you mean?

well, repetition is the base of all learning. A man may copy artworks for 50 years and one day make his own piece, that surpasses all that came before him. You cannot deny him the chance to do that, and by no means does it make him uncreative.

If we cut the chaff from this thread, I think we all agree that passing someone else's work off as your own is disgraceful. But inspiration is a total gray area.

I'm in the camp that says: "Its fine to be inspired by other artists, even steal ideas from them. This is how I evolve as an artist". (designer in my case ;)

[Rob Galanakis]

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i155/8FtSpider/Misc/Maybe_Worse.jpg

I hope that was a joke, but if not, thank you for proving my point. In comic book world, superheroes can put the entire universe and spectrum of human experience and morality into badass oneliners, but in the real world, there are infinite shades of gray and difference of experience and opinions and morals.

If one were to try and argue that stealing a dollar were as bad or worse than stealing a million, I'm sure they'd have no problem maintaining philosophical integrity, but would have a hell of a hard time making anything practical out of it.

[Blaizer]

I should have not said that phrase in the way i did, so sorry if someone get offended: "Those who are influenced by other artists do not have style". With influence, i mean -to copy from-.

Here, the people was talking about to get inspired/influenced/borrow/copy... too many terms with similar meanings. All very gray :). It wasn't my intention to lead to confusion Pior.

It may sounds like bullshit, but it's not something so terrible, because when you get inspired by someone's work, and specially from an artwork, essentially, you copy something from it because you like it. That's why i prefer to take inspiration from nature. what do you say when a person have the same or similar style as another person? (same style does not mean they are not creative)

For example, those artists:

Kawarahima Koh & Satoshi Urushihara <--- Same style
Misato Mitsumi & Tatsuki Amaduyu & Nakamura Takeshi <--- Same Style

Could you say me who's the teacher and the pupil? who knows... who copied? the same... who knows.

I really don't know who is frazetta, and like you can see, i only know japanese artists. Time to google him :)

Also I could take your art as a counter example. I like your monsters, but I noticed a few times that artists commented on them by saying 'hey didnt you do the same model already?'I'm making style :), perfecting designs i have. To show similar designs makes people to recognize your work better. I remenber to answer some times that yes, that i make similar designs as a way to improve my old designs (new versions).

I'm not stucked as you may think. I'm not offended if someone says me what you pointed, as a hobbyst, i mainly do what i like the most and that's what really matters for me. I'm not so susceptible. Of course, that's not reason to be stucked in other areas because i don't touch them.

With the ability "to cook" i mean that taking parts from different sources from real world (nature), you can imaginate and create something new. for example, mixing a crocodile with a hornet and having humanish proportions. It may result ridiculous if is "cooked" bad and with bad ingredients too (like the greek method of mixing).

[Blaizer]

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i155/8FtSpider/Misc/Maybe_Worse.jpg

LOL principles, he's a hero, isn't he?

[Mezz]

Ok, without wading too deeply into the heavy discussion going on here, lemme just make one point...

No two artists have the exact same style.
Don't bother bringing up examples, I won't change my mind :p I believe a person's style is just as unique to them as a fingerprint. Yes, some of us do stuff that looks very similar to other artists of the area, but when it comes down to every detail, every stroke, every line, the style is never going to be the same. It's a matter of how no two people are the same and how each one of us have our own individual upbringing and life experiences and just something of the essence of who we are. This is what affects our style, in not just visual art but any type of art and really just any and everything in life.

[kat]

This problem always seems to me to be one of INTENT.

So using the example of the 'alien' shown on pg2, the BAD isn't overtly bad unless the artist intentionally never made mention of the source of his version, where he drew his idea from.

We all know it's impossible to design/think in a vacuum so it's really just a question of being honest about the ideas you have, no one really looks down others using work for the further expansion of ideas or thoughts - as was mentioned already, the 'bad' just looks like a different species on the same planet - it becomes bad when it's fobbed off as being 'original' when there's clear reference to something else without mention being made of that fact.

[Mark Dygert]

LOL principles, he's a hero, isn't he?
I'm pretty sure that's Dare Devil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_(Marvel_Comics) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_%28Marvel_Comics%29)

[Jeremy Wright]

I'm pretty sure that's Dare Devil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_(Marvel_Comics) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_%28Marvel_Comics%29)

Yeah, and the "woman" he's talking to is the Devil in disguise trying to tempt him, srsly.

No, I wasn't joking, 420. This comic was the first thing that sprang to my mind after the first part of your post. I first read this comic probably 15 years ago and that panel always stuck with me. Maybe it's not realistic to bring comic book morals into a real world discussion, but the morals espoused within helped to form my outlook on bending/breaking the rules.

What it says to me is it's worse to steal one dollar because it's pointless in the fact that what good is a dollar going to do you? You've lost just as much integrity in the action as stealing lots of money. It says don't sell yourself out for a fleeting moment.

Sure, stealing a tv and robbing a bank are different, but they're both stupid and they're both wrong. Apples and oranges are different but they're both fruit. You can argue schemantics all day long if you want.

Stealing is stealing. Maybe one draws the line between stealing from your friends and stealing from strangers. Maybe one draws the line between stealing from small and big business. Maybe one draws the line between stealing little things and stealing big things. Maybe someone just likes drawing lines that they step over, step around, or smudge.

[danr]

i was gonna post explaining a basic point, but Ruz and Kat have the actual problem pretty much nailed.

employ some common sense whilst working and don't be an arsehole. Not a world beater

unfortunately, amongst the hand-wringing "tortured artist" brigade, common sense rarely applies. Well, you make your own problems, bollocks to you

[leilei]

I'm pretty sure that's Dare Devil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_(Marvel_Comics) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_%28Marvel_Comics%29)

i think he's referring to bill clinton in the middle

[bearkub]

http://www.applegeeks.com/lite/strips/aglite345.jpg

[hobodactyl]

I totally agree with the common sense idea :P

I have to say, though, the Daredevil argument, or the TV versus robbing a bank, really doesn't transfer well. Clearly if I went and stole the Mona Lisa that would be just as bad as if I went into your apartment and stole a painting you made (assuming you aren't famous). This implies I am taking the ownership of an ITEM from someone else, whereas we are generally saying "don't copy and paste and then push the pixels around!"

I have a book cover from some crappy old Choose-Your-Own-Adventure that I bought recently, and I realized it really reminded me of a picture I had seen in some "Learn-To-Draw!" book I bought a while back. I compared the two side by side, and it is VERY obvious the newer picture was made with the older as reference (it's some spikey lizard dude in a torn up robe in a particular pose, so it's pretty clearly "copied"). However, the new one is still entirely hand-painted, and has it's own changes and improvements, not like it's traced or anything. So did that artist steal the piece? I think they would have a hard time denying they weren't using the older piece as an almost direct reference, but it's still their own work.

COMMON SENSE PREVAILS!

[J Randall]

with the choose your own adventure book and the learn to draw book is it obvious its two different artists or one artist using two different mediums?

In art class in high school we were taught the finer points of stealing art, not that it was encouraged but just as a cover your own ass, whoops you found out your accidentally without truly meaning to steal, something like a handy number of making sure there's 10 count em 10 obvious differences between your work and the artwork your offending. :)

I mean hell my first character that I consider "my own" is a school girl with a robotic arm and she blows stuff up, I am sure there's 15 different ones in manga, I haven't searched to see if I am copying anything cause I am 99 percent sure I am not.

I don't mean to steer the conversation elsewhere with that statement.

[tremulant]

It's very easy to kind of pick on Blazier, because although he doesn't see it, we all know that we have been influenced by artists and what they have learned in the years before us.

With that said, I think he brings up some really interesting thoughts and just merely thinking them, I think gives him an uperhand in creating art that is more untainted by other artists work.

I'm not saying if you simply believe you have your own style-that you magically will. But if you admit that you steal-and you constantly look at other peoples artwork to add elements to yours, then how can you every be completely satisfied with your work?

I guess it just comes down to this... We all have been influenced, whether we admit it or not, but developing your own style is something you do once you have gotten down the basics(that you learned from other artist hard work/viewing nature) and deviate in your own direction. I think there is just a point where you take off the training wheels and become more original.

[seanv]

It seems to me you copy to get good, but once your good you won't copy. As far as pushing pixels, I get internet pics to blend and overlay on portions of paintings/textures all the time. I plan to keep doing it.

[Joseph Silverman]

I'm pretty sure that's Dare Devil. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_(Marvel_Comics) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daredevil_%28Marvel_Comics%29)


Okay, i normally think that picking on peope for grammar is annoying and pointless, but that is abhorrent and hurts every time i read it.

http://www.answers.com/topic/daredevil

It's a word. That is his name, so, proper noun. Daredevil. 'Dare... Devil' makes no sense.

[King Mango]

This has been around probably as long as art itself. Any kind of creative ideas really.
I personally believe that sooner or later, the imposter will be exposed whether through a keen random observer, or through the rigors of employment.
We've had several instances in design communities where someone rips code and other assets and a lot of the time doesn't even bother to try and cover it up.
But in the end, true talent is not in danger of any real significant damage from hacks.
I've seen ten different remakes of some of my maps, and only a few ever asked for permission. I always give permission, and in the end, I don't care about the others really. I did the original, and I can prove it to anyone it matters to.

Of course these people should be confronted and treated accordingly too. Don't get me wrong.

[Justin Meisse]

facepalm

I see a heavy manga/anime/japanese game artist influence on most of Blaizers monsters, I didn't want to sound like a jerk before

I don't know if this a confusion born of different languages, influenced by doesn't mean you copy them. But maybe I'm totally wrong, Da Vinci was influenced by Verrocchio while Blaizer is only influenced by nature.

[perna]

I have a book cover from some crappy old Choose-Your-Own-Adventure that I bought recently, and I realized it really reminded me of a picture I had seen in some "Learn-To-Draw!" book I bought a while back. I compared the two side by side, and it is VERY obvious the newer picture was made with the older as reference (it's some spikey lizard dude in a torn up robe in a particular pose, so it's pretty clearly "copied"). However, the new one is still entirely hand-painted, and has it's own changes and improvements, not like it's traced or anything. So did that artist steal the piece? I think they would have a hard time denying they weren't using the older piece as an almost direct reference, but it's still their own work.


Are you talking about this? I've kept the book for 15 years purely because of the awesomeness of the cover!

http://www.gamebooks.org/gallery/figfan03o.jpg

[Mark Dygert]

Okay, i normally think that picking on peope for grammar is annoying and pointless, but that is abhorrent and hurts every time i read it.

http://www.answers.com/topic/daredevil

It's a word. That is his name, so, proper noun. Daredevil. 'Dare... Devil' makes no sense.


I agree whoever this peope guy is, he really needs to clean up his posts.
I'm all for letting your inner comic dork flag fly, but wow, you put on the shorts, the cape and the cowl. Meow!

[LEViATHAN]

Someone sold some of my models on Turbosquid some time ago. :shifty:

Not cool.

[Ruz]

my art is influenced by cave paintings.

[JKMakowka]

It's only theft if you believe in ownership, which is just a concept we all agree on in modern society.

Being a Navajo native living in pre-Columbus north America, I have no concept of ownership and property.

I guess you were trying to be funny, but the concept of ownership is indeed something that people do not really understand and that has taken a radical turn for the worse in the last 100 years or so.

In fact Smith, who is often described as the founding father of capitalism, very correctly deduced that ownership and property arn't concepts of their own (as often though of in todays society), but inherently linked to usage.
In other words, you are only entitled to own something if you actually use it... or at least that is what logic would suggest and how the law would be if the world wasn't such a fucked up place.

[Sandbag]

considering the banishment of "ownership" is quite possibly the single most dangerous thing to the continued livelihood of the professional artist...It might not sound as scary to every "game artist" because we rarely get to own what we produce, however to any Illustrator or Graphic Designer this is a horrifying thought.

I can only assume that those offended by the stealing analogy have once stolen themselves and feel badly about it. Even though it is from a comic book that Daredevil line is actually a good quotable; people may want to say that stealing a dollar (or a candy bar, or anything else of "little value") is "not that bad", but you're violating your principals (assuming you have any) for something that you should have no reason to be unable to acquire legitimately. If that's not pathetic I don't know what is.

[leilei]

Someone sold some of my models on Turbosquid some time ago. :shifty:

Not cool.

oh dear i hate it when that happens, especially since trying to deal with turbosquid on trying to prove how its stolen sorta requires you to purchase the thieving asset or they won't believe you etc. Pretty broken system there. Con artists will rip off anyone especially taking free models from 3dcafe and selling it for $60+ on turbosquid no problem
there's also the issue of unauthorized profiting off copyrighted characters (http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-model-characters-woman-female/339426) i think too

[tremulant]

I went to AIP with this guy, He actually had his portfolio revoked because of his blatant plagiarism.
We were looking at his site, and are sure we have seen some of this work in other places....can anyone spot copied work, or are we just insane?

http://richard-michaud.com/

[arrangemonk]

does this "stealing art" count on meshflow?
i often copy meshflow from other poeole , for eg:
mindvoice: "damn, the deformation sucks, how did this guy do that, it seems that it deforms very well" :
->copyying meshflow pic, recreate it in 3d , deform it to fit the on mesh, adding to the mesh, testing the deformation, being satisfied ( i mostly do that in the upper arm region of organic models)

[Mark Dygert]

Edge flow? I don't think so. There is good edge flow and you'll only muck it up trying to "not copy" everyone.

[bearkub]

OK, this thread is being closed because just about everything I asked not to happen has happened. Good thread though and some really good stuff came out of it. Thanks to those who gave input!