There doesn't have to be a "source" if she creates a new artwork inspired by something! Art is about getting inspired by all sorts of things and also other artists. If you don't get this then you should seek activities somewhere else because you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.
Well that's what this whole thing was about and how it could have been avoided.
I didn't have anything to do with the post being listed here but think their point is fair. It's a courtesy to give the source material a mention.
If you ever watch DBZ abridged (a fan based parody if DragonBall Z), you will notice they give credit in the beginning of each episode to Funimation and Akira Toriyama.
It is a courtesy and users should be encouraged to do so. It doesn't take much time and perhaps sends traffic to the creator of the source of the inspired work.
Without their original work, the inspired works would not exist so think that's reasonable. @gric, not sure why you think this a hard thing and want to suppose anybody that doesn't is clueless. That's kind of an extreme way to think.
TL;DR: I think we both agree that we wouldn't call this necessarily plagiarism but we seem to disagree on whether on author should include source of creative inspiration.
@anthonyadavisii,
Over decades I've been using tons of references/inspirations I found on the Internet. The Internet is to me and to most other artists a very important source of inspiration on many levels. But I also see many artists finding inspiration in my own work. I see it in games, in tattoos, in illustrations, in paintings. BUT THIS IS ALL NOT ABOUT PLAGIARISM! So if some anonymous denunciator like @jaguar.force can't tell the difference then I will certainly not encourage him/her in his/her moronic activities by discussing "his/her point". It's just another retarded asshole hiding behind an avatar and patronizing people!
If @adelepazani got inspired by a photo she can tell us, but she doesn't have to. It's her fucking business and not yours or the one of some self-entitled denunciator. She created a new and distinct artwork. It's neither a cover nor a replica. If you are in doubts then I'd suggest you ask professional VISUAL artists because as a marine, IT professional, blockchain enthusiast and meme-ologist this topic is certainly not within your expertise.
If you are in doubts then I'd suggest you ask professional VISUAL artists because as a marine, IT professional, blockchain enthusiast and meme-ologist this topic is certainly not within your expertise.
First off, appeal to authority is a logical fallacy so you should probably bin that argument.
We agree that trying to say this was plagiarism was not the appropriate response so we are on the same page there.
Even so, I stand by my words that it is courteous to mention the source inspiration. It shouldn't even be a debate and it is a peculiar "hill to die on".
If I created anothet form of a work, should I not point to the original work? For example, I create a watercolor version of another's pastel work. Would it not be courteous to mention them?
If I created anothet form of a work, should I not point to the original work? For example, I create a watercolor version of another's pastel work. Would it not be courteous to mention them?
Yes, depending on the level of resemblance it might make sense. But this case is absolutely not about a replica! This cretin must have used a face recognition service to find out what image she got the inspiration from - Google Image Search wouldn't find it! @jaguar.force, get a life and go selling pizza or something! :-)
Ahhhh I see. Yeah they should most definitely credit the source that inspired their work. Thanks for clarifying
Posted using Partiko Android
so it was all your fighting ? nice
As long as you add your creative source, there is no problem.
Posted using Partiko Android
There doesn't have to be a "source" if she creates a new artwork inspired by something! Art is about getting inspired by all sorts of things and also other artists. If you don't get this then you should seek activities somewhere else because you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.
Well that's what this whole thing was about and how it could have been avoided.
I didn't have anything to do with the post being listed here but think their point is fair. It's a courtesy to give the source material a mention.
If you ever watch DBZ abridged (a fan based parody if DragonBall Z), you will notice they give credit in the beginning of each episode to Funimation and Akira Toriyama.
It is a courtesy and users should be encouraged to do so. It doesn't take much time and perhaps sends traffic to the creator of the source of the inspired work.
Without their original work, the inspired works would not exist so think that's reasonable. @gric, not sure why you think this a hard thing and want to suppose anybody that doesn't is clueless. That's kind of an extreme way to think.
TL;DR: I think we both agree that we wouldn't call this necessarily plagiarism but we seem to disagree on whether on author should include source of creative inspiration.
@anthonyadavisii,
Over decades I've been using tons of references/inspirations I found on the Internet. The Internet is to me and to most other artists a very important source of inspiration on many levels. But I also see many artists finding inspiration in my own work. I see it in games, in tattoos, in illustrations, in paintings. BUT THIS IS ALL NOT ABOUT PLAGIARISM! So if some anonymous denunciator like @jaguar.force can't tell the difference then I will certainly not encourage him/her in his/her moronic activities by discussing "his/her point". It's just another retarded asshole hiding behind an avatar and patronizing people!
If @adelepazani got inspired by a photo she can tell us, but she doesn't have to. It's her fucking business and not yours or the one of some self-entitled denunciator. She created a new and distinct artwork. It's neither a cover nor a replica. If you are in doubts then I'd suggest you ask professional VISUAL artists because as a marine, IT professional, blockchain enthusiast and meme-ologist this topic is certainly not within your expertise.
First off, appeal to authority is a logical fallacy so you should probably bin that argument.
We agree that trying to say this was plagiarism was not the appropriate response so we are on the same page there.
Even so, I stand by my words that it is courteous to mention the source inspiration. It shouldn't even be a debate and it is a peculiar "hill to die on".
If I created anothet form of a work, should I not point to the original work? For example, I create a watercolor version of another's pastel work. Would it not be courteous to mention them?
That's all I am saying.
Yes, depending on the level of resemblance it might make sense. But this case is absolutely not about a replica! This cretin must have used a face recognition service to find out what image she got the inspiration from - Google Image Search wouldn't find it!
@jaguar.force, get a life and go selling pizza or something! :-)
Dying...
.