I will not take part in this pointless and unneccesary discussion, as I'd most likely get banned or told off by numerous overreacting GSs as I always do, but

HountedHearth wrote:

I've seen kids at the age of 14 making proper renders on deviantArt.

What the **** does age have to do with any of this? Seriously?

Healer_11 wrote:

I will not take part in this pointless and unneccesary discussion, as I'd most likely get banned or told off by numerous overreacting GSs as I always do, but HountedHearth wrote: I've seen kids at the age of 14 making proper renders on deviantArt.   What the **** does age have to do with any of this? Seriously?

To tell you that even a kid can make renders, which is an example as of how easy making renders is, because you don't need much skill to get it done. (and I'm not talking about some of those 1 out of a thousand miracle kids) The difference between skill at the age of 14 and at the age of 20+ is big. And it's this difference that sometimes decides whether you are capable of doing something (properly) or not.

HountedHearth wrote:

Healer_11 wrote: I will not take part in this pointless and unneccesary discussion, as I'd most likely get banned or told off by numerous overreacting GSs as I always do, but HountedHearth wrote: I've seen kids at the age of 14 making proper renders on deviantArt.   What the **** does age have to do with any of this? Seriously?   To tell you that even a kid can make renders, which is an example as of how easy making renders is, because you don't need much skill to get it done. (and I'm not talking about some of those 1 out of a thousand miracle kids) The difference between skill at the age of 14 and at the age of 20+ is big. And it's this difference that sometimes decides whether you are capable of doing something (properly) or not.

I don't agree with both of your statements.
1. Imo, making renders isn't easy.I have been making signatures for over 1.5 years, and I have only ever tried to render a few images, and the results were far from great.
2. Age doesn't determine if someone can do something or not - maturity does. Age doesn't reflect maturity. A 14 year old can be more independant and mature than a 20 year old.

People are so prejudiced, it's pathetic. And I disagree that 14 is a kid.

This argument is dumb and you should feel dumb.

another unnecessary thread

The rest what I said may be unnecessary and dumb, I'll admit it, but making profit of signatures with copyrighted material or someone else's hard work in them is just wrong, plain wrong.

HountedHearth wrote:

The rest what I said may be unnecessary and dumb, I'll admit it, but making profit of signatures with copyrighted material or someone else's hard work in them is just wrong, plain wrong.

I agree. Profiting off of someone else's work without sanction is wrong. I don't agree that simply using them should have any moral repercussions though. Renders are freely available, and using one is appreciating someone's work.

In my opinion.

While your original post had good intentions and one or two good points, it spiraled downward from there. There is a lot to be said for both sides of this argument. But let us discuss them without a demeaning attitude, yes?

It comes down to the question, "What Is Art?" There are plenty of instances where another work of art has been reproduced in a brand new manner to become its own work of art.

What is done here may be considered "Derivative works". In most cases, copyright can't be claimed on them because of varying factors. In short, all transfers of a creative, copyrightable work into a new medium count as derivative works. Also, all other modifications whose outcome is a new, creatively original work.

US Copyright act of 1976 wrote:

"the design of a useful article [...] shall be considered a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work only if, and only to the extent that, such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independ­ently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article."

If something is created that is wholely a new work of art out of, say, a render of another image. Then there should be no issues with copyright.

You also have to look at Artistic Property which is an author's right. For instance, the Associated Press' fight against Shepard Fairey for using one of the news agency's copyrighted photographs to create the famous Barack Obama "Hope" image. That lawsuit settled before any judicial determination of whether Fairey had a "fair use" right to transform the photograph. Creating a new work that builds on and transforms the old does not eviscerate the Copyright Act. It's actually very much in line with the purpose of copyright, which is to encourage the creation of additional works that benefit the public.

Just my Input for what it is worth.

Hey, Art Guru (OP), Seeing as you've insulted just about every signature artist on the forum almost entirely on the source of their stocks. Maybe quiet time?

About the rendering kids - I was rendering images 8 years ago (at 14), and I was pentooling it and using clipping masks with an intuos3 (brand new at the time!), much more difficult and cleaner than a fool with an eraser tool. In fact, all the top renderers, photomanipulators, graphic artists/designers use this method, an extraction method in PS, or even using lasso tools - not erasing in GIMP. Do you have any idea what you're talking about when it comes down to image editting softwares? o.O

There are like 2-3 people on here that are actually selling their tags. If you have an issue with them, man up and pm them. I'll be glad to read as no doubt some is aimed at myself. ^_^

The reason I sell my tags is I dont have much free time. People mentioned to me that they would be willing to pay for theirs in previous threads and via pm.
Now, I've spent over £30k and 9 years for my education, software and hardware, and you are belittling me on where I obtain my stocks, JUST because I am asking for recompense for my time?
I'm offended. Well and truly.

That guy who made the OP wrote:

As for discrediting signature artists: There are people out there making profit by selling their signatures, I refuse to speak 1 good word about them or acknowledge whatever skill those sellers have, unless they provide something that is for a full 100% their own (this means, not using images somebody else made).

I'm not asking for your good word. Or your acknowledgement. I'm asking where you're going with this? Closed shops? Bans?

But hey, since you can't acknowledge any skill that I may or may not have, how about a wee little GFX or DP competition between you and I?
I'd love to see your work.

Healer_11 wrote:

2. Age doesn't determine if someone can do something or not - maturity does. Age doesn't reflect maturity. A 14 year old can be more independant and mature than a 20 year old.

stonekidd wrote:

About the rendering kids - I was rendering images 8 years ago (at 14), and I was pentooling it and using clipping masks with an intuos3 (brand new at the time!), much more difficult and cleaner than a fool with an eraser tool. In fact, all the top renderers, photomanipulators, graphic artists/designers use this method, an extraction method in PS, or even using lasso tools - not erasing in GIMP. Do you have any idea what you're talking about when it comes down to image editting softwares? o.O

+1
the pentool is awesome and so is wacom, i love my intuos <3 xD

I think various people have covered this topic very well. I just predict more insults and demeaning comments coming, perhaps request a lock and get this topic removed entirely? I'm getting tired of looking at it here...