HOME | DD

DapperMan In reply to kobaltkween [2012-05-10 15:51:18 +0000 UTC]

Thanks! A week was spent on the shaders, so the BG (a Vue environment in 3ds max)was an afterthought. Even a moon or a planet in the sky would have helped, but I just had to move on.

I learned about XNALara 2 weeks ago, which led to learning how to import things directly into max. Alone it's kinda limited for my tastes, but I'll have to look at the Blender galleries to see how they work together.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

kobaltkween In reply to DapperMan [2012-05-11 09:41:36 +0000 UTC]

Well, just to warn you, I read a blog post yesterday by Cymae that there's a "zero tolerance" policy here for exported game meshes. Personally, I find it completely arbitrary. They have an explicit fan art gallery, which she mentions as OK in her blog post, but there seems to be some problem with exported models used personally. Since fan art is actually a violation of copyright (as well as trademark in some cases) which companies like Disney and Fox used to pursue with vigor, and since fan art is derived from the work of concept artists, cinematographers, photographers, illustrators, writers, and other artists, I personally don't see the legal or moral difference between the two. Just adding modelers to the list of artists (or models to the list of company IP) doesn't seem more or less egregious to me. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to come down to the notion that modeling is the hardest thing you can do (I find modeling _much_ easier than texturing and worlds easier than coding materials), and placing a premium on modelers' work being used in derivative works. Personally, I don't see the difference between modeling based on a series of screen shots and cutting out the middle man and exporting. I _think_ the basis for the judgement is the notion that art is about skill, and that 3d modeling is the most relevant skill. It's like how all the digital paintings (many of which involve tracing) based on professional photos of actors and actresses who have legal rights concerning licensing and their likeness are not only tolerated but make DDs all the time without any credit for sources (and certainly not including writers for making the characters), photo manipulations are generally acknowledged as skilled art, but their are _large_ anti-Poser 3d groups here, as well as several explicitly stating you have to model everything in your image.

But I think the whole discussion of violation around the idea of whether it involves skill or not is completely beside the point of whether or not there's a moral or ethical issue. In college I had this friend who was an absolutely incredible artist. Our freshman year, my roommate and I had a room so popular our friends would hang out there all the time (even when we were both in class). One day I came back and he had destroyed my friend's brand new Crayola's (she was and is an awesome artist herself, and had gotten them for fun), as well as a candle of mine without asking. He used them to make something cool, but honestly, I didn't care. Having talent didn't give him any more right than anyone else to use our stuff without permission and to trash it on top of it. The attitude that talent and skill(or intelligence) gives people moral superiority and entitles them to use whatever they want however they want is bad for everyone, IMHO. Either it's always a violation or it's not.

I love seeing craftsmanship, I admire skills of all kinds, and I love seeing someone put a lot of thought into their work. I honestly don't have an issue with most derivative works, but especially ones not involving redistribution of the original or money. I think there always needs to be a balance between the rights of the creator and the rights of the public, because creators take so much of their work from the public and then depend on the public integrating the creations into their lives to be successful. That said, I totally understand those who have a more restrictive view of the ethics of derivative works. I don't understand giving some people preferential treatment because of the medium they choose or their skill level.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

DapperMan In reply to kobaltkween [2012-05-12 01:30:28 +0000 UTC]

Well... crap. I hate to be restricted to Rendo to post fan art using these models. I was going to try to make more of these pics, but now I think I'll just keep my head down regarding these models. You're right, I can see how ripping models can be seen as a violation, but then the thousands who have posted Star Wars art using movie photo reference have violated the spirit of this rule as well. For that matter, modelling a Porsche or an HP computer monitor or any existing manufactured object is derivative and should be a violation of someone's intellectual property, but there's no outcry about that. Any of this can be taken to insane extremes, but it likely comes down to dA doing a selective CYA maneuver. Sure, 3D work is difficult (but so is 2D!), but I don't see why it should be singled out more intensely than 2D.

But thanks for pointing that out to me. I might have made a few more of these and attracted enough attention to get into trouble! Maybe I can use what I've learned to start modding the actual game instead of making art from it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0