Dolls, a big problem.

KisaShika · Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:34 pm Post subject: Dolls, a big problem.

This is all in opinions, but I really don't think FAC should allow edited Dolls/Pixel figures. Even if the owner of the Doll says that you can post them as long as you give a link back the their website.

Edited Dolls have absolutely NO creativity in them and seeing the same Doll OVER and OVER again gets boring and old; and they should count in the 'Edit' category, becuase they are. Also, if you didn't draw it, it really shouldn't count as FANART, correct?

I know alot of you 'newbies', who's gallery's are FULL of them, are gonna' say "OMG! THEY'S ARNT EDITZ, THEY ARE ATR1!!!1!". I've been told this by many people, but no matter what you say; they're edits, get over it. Edits are edits, even if they're over dolls, and should not be accepted even under the creators circumstances.

This is FANART-Central people; not EDITEDDOLL-Central.

rlkitten · Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject:

When I saw all those pics in other peoples gallerys I thought that too.
_________________
"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people -and kill them."
[img]http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/yy341/KuroiFaith/Zeldabanner.jpg[/img]

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

I wasn't aware you're allowed to post edits.

Some pixel doll artists actually do their own people, not just the hair and clothing, and these people should be allowed to post their work here.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

rlkitten · Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:56 pm Post subject:

But you never know what people are actually making the whole pixel doll from what people are just doing the hair and clothing
_________________
"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people -and kill them."
[img]http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/yy341/KuroiFaith/Zeldabanner.jpg[/img]

KisaShika · Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject:

But the ones I'm taking about are the people who TAKE dolls from another website, edit them to their liking, and then post them here as their own art. Here are a few examples.

http://www.fanart-central.net/pic-651938.html
http://www.fanart-central.net/pic-649207.html
http://www.fanart-central.net/pic-649986.html
http://www.fanart-central.net/pic-636844.html

They even say that they got the doll from another website and they get their so called 'bases' from here.

http://lorelei.mystarseed.com/

rlkitten · Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:10 pm Post subject:

yeah, yeah- I know. It's against the rules!!!1 Dolls/bases= just not right!!
_________________
"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people -and kill them."
[img]http://i806.photobucket.com/albums/yy341/KuroiFaith/Zeldabanner.jpg[/img]

Jedi · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:01 am Post subject:

I agree about Pixel Dolls not being true art. It's more assemble, rather than straight out and draw a figure. Which is why I always either draw my stuff from my own head and use reference images for my own posings, or just copy a character or something from the image source. All you need is to practise at this... mind you, I'm still practising!

Stratadrake · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:28 am Post subject:

This subject has been come up before but failed to reach any consensus.

FIRST: What is the difference between doll edits and other eidts? Why should we allow one but the other, even if both are fully credited and the submitter has taken time to cite permission for editing?

My personal (non official) opinion on this matter, quite bluntly, is this: Do any of you have actual experience in pixel art that you can validly claim there is "no skill" involved?
_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

[quote]# Collaborative Works, as explained in Section 1, can be deleted as a copyright violation if we cannot verify or and/or do not believe that any "fair-use" agreement between two artists was ever made. Therefore, if you are working on a collaborative piece, you must cite who else is assisting you in the work, so that it may be verified.

# Implicit permission, for example "free" lineart on a website which allows users to use and color in themselves, are considered copyrighted material and generally do not qualify as "fair use" or as a collaborative work, and therefore may not be used. This rule also applies to use of "dolls" or "genreators", regardless of whether you know or credit the source website.[/quote]

If the doll is a collaboration between two artists, like one person did the body and one person did the clothes/hair, then it should be allowed.
If the body was taken off a website and can be used by anyone, it should not be allowed.
If the same person drew everything from scratch, it should be allowed.

That the medium is pixels shouldn't play any part in this conversation.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

[u][url=http://i11.tinypic.com/716sbiq.png]This[/url][/u] is a KiSS doll. It's like those interactive flash dress up dolls, but not as sucky. It's interactive and requires downloading and a special program to run it. I drew this totally from scratch and invested at least 30 hours in it over months and months.

Don't tell me that's not art.

I've actually made a lot of these over the last.. 9 years, but have never submitted them to FAC because there isn't any place to put them, and some retard will probably just move my clothes around, screen shot it, and call it their own.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

KisaShika · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject:

[quote="Stratadrake"]My personal (non official) opinion on this matter, quite bluntly, is this: Do any of you have actual experience in pixel art that you can validly claim there is "no skill" involved?[/quote]

I have spent some time in Paint to know the difrrence bewtween an Edit and actual pixel work. All of these so called 'bases' are edited from a doll at some website.

[quote="London"][u][url=http://i11.tinypic.com/716sbiq.png]This[/url][/u] is a KiSS doll. It's like those interactive flash dress up dolls, but not as sucky. It's interactive and requires downloading and a special program to run it. I drew this totally from scratch and invested at least 30 hours in it over months and months.[/quote]

But I'm not talking about people who actually made the WHOLE pixel picture. I'm just pointing out the recent ones who have ripped the image from another website and edited it to their liking.

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

If I'm reading the rules correctly, those people are breaking the rules and their pictures should be removed.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

KisaShika · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:23 pm Post subject:

EXACTLY! That's what I'm saying! Those pictures shouldn't be allowed to be posted.

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

Then when you find one, bring it to the attention of Battou or Strata or somebody.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

KisaShika · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:18 pm Post subject:

Well, theres a problem with that. I already told Battou about them through a PM; and he said that they were allowed.

And so brings back up why I posted this; EDITED DOLLS should not be allowed to be posted. This problem needs to be fixed by placing a new rule that they aren't allowed.

Stratadrake · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:49 pm Post subject:

Kisa, do you even have an answer to one of my (or London's) objections?

What, exactly, makes a "doll" so different from any other type of edit, that we must have separate rules for each?

[quote]If the doll is a collaboration between two artists, like one person did the body and one person did the clothes/hair, then it should be allowed.
If the body was taken off a website and can be used by anyone, it should not be allowed.
If the same person drew everything from scratch, it should be allowed.

[b]That the medium is pixels shouldn't play any part in this conversation.[/b][/quote]
One of the best artguments I've heard to date.

Now if the policy is "only by FAC users" that is a good proposal, both clear and easy to enforce.

But when you simply say "a website", that is not clear at all. Do we allow other art sites (deviantART, etc.) ? Do we allow personal websites? What about users who are both registered on a public art site but operate their own personal website as well?

The only guideline we have right now is the "fully credited" rule, user must clearly state the original owner, website, source image, etc. under penalty of deletion otherwise.

I have some plans to improve and expand the functionality of the "Pending" userpage tab, if or when that is complete then we can start enforcing the line more closely.

[quote]I'm just pointing out the recent ones who have ripped the image from another website and edited it to their liking.[/quote]
PM me or Battou and we can take a look.
_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

London · Moderator Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 6474

[quote]# Implicit permission, for example "free" lineart on a website which allows users to use and color in themselves, are considered copyrighted material and generally do not qualify as "fair use" or as a collaborative work, and therefore may not be used. This rule also applies to use of "dolls" or "genreators", regardless of whether you know or credit the source website.[/quote]

Something like this ^. When I say website, I mean that the doll base was just posted by someone on the internet, usually on their personal site, and is free for anyone to edit to their liking. This should not be allowed.

If it is a collaboration, the person who created the base and the person who made the clothing would work closely together, and after that picture has been completed, no part of it is ever reused for anything else. This should be allowed.
_________________
[i][size=9]Go Yankees![/size][/i]

Stratadrake · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:58 pm Post subject:

[quote]# Implicit permission, for example "free" lineart on a website which allows users to use and color in themselves, are considered copyrighted material and generally do not qualify as "fair use" or as a collaborative work, and therefore may not be used. This rule also applies to use of "dolls" or "generators", regardless of whether you know or credit the source website.[/quote]
I remember that (I wrote it), unfortunately lumping the phrase "doll' in the same sentence as "generator" can't be allowed to stay. It needs changing ... but how?

And can we please get some opinions by users with dolled creations in their gallery? If there are any changes to the handling of dolls/bases they will be the first ones affected, they have a right to participate in the discussion themselves.
_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]

KisaShika · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:16 pm Post subject:

I said it before; I've already told Battou about a few I had already seen and he said that they were allowed. I know edits aren't allowed, and these dolls that are being posted ARE infact edits.

Stratadrake · Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:28 pm Post subject:

[quote]I said it before....[/quote]
If I missed it, please quote it out again.

[quote]and these dolls that are being posted ARE infact edits.[/quote]
"Edits" is the specific intent of a pixel doll. It also happens to be the nature of colored lineart. If you're going to describe them all with the same word, they should all be treated with the same rule unless there is a damning reason not to.

For example, we don't allow edits of game sprites, screenshots, etc. Why? Those are protected by three little words called "All Right Reseved", and given that the owner is (typically) a large commercial organization, suffice it to say that you never get permission by the owner to edit or re-use that stuff, [i]period[/i]. Yes, you [i]can[/i] write the company a letter asking for such permission, but unless hell freezes over good luck seeing a response of any kind, let alone "yes".

If "doll" edits should be treated the same way, you need to give some reasons (not just personal opinions) proving why, and be prepared to provide some reason why we should [b]NOT[/b] also extend those exact same reasons to every other form of "edit".
_________________
Strata here: [url=http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/242293]Nanowrimo[/url] - [url=www.fanart-central.net/user-Stratadrake.php]FAC[/url] - [url=http://stratadrake.deviantart.com]dA[/url] - [url=www.furaffinity.net/user/Stratadrake/]FA[/url]
[size=9]Disclaimer: Posts may contain URLs. Click [url=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife]at your own risk.[/url][/size]