Revision required
Printed From: Pixel Joint
Category: The Lounge
Forum Name: Resources and Support
Forum Discription: Help your fellow pixel artists out with links to good tutorials, other forums, software, fonts, etc. Bugs and support issues should go here as well.
URL: https://pixeljoint.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24723
Printed Date: 13 September 2025 at 11:10am
Topic: Revision required
Posted By: scwol
Subject: Revision required
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 6:10am
|
After a few days I have got message that I need revision on my pixel art.
http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/99622.htm - This art http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/99633.htm - and this one I see no problems with this arts so I hope they can be accepted back asap. |
Replies:
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 7:01am
|
The main problem is that you used someone else's art as a base to create your pixel.
Plagiarism is a very bad thing in any art and unethical. No one likes their work used by another and as an art gallery its uncool to allow. Every artist should understand this. Making derivative work or original version of another's work is acceptable as original work. Making pixels from your own NPA is a process so that's cool. The forest scene riled up far too many and we did in fact tested it and you did pixel it well and it is very nice but its just lines up perfectly with the photographer's original and thus entered Plagiarismland. I hope you understand this is about respect for all artists and not a judgment on your work or skill. We defend all artists PJer or not. ------------- |
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 7:19am
|
Plagiarism does not fit right here because I used photos and somebody's artwork. I have also linked to photo which I used for both arts.
Really sad that other artists can use references and you can't JUST BECAUSE. |
Posted By: eishiya
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 8:12am
|
Using references and copying images are two different things. In using a reference, you look at an image, learn from it, and create your own, different image. What you did was create a pixel art version of someone else's image rather than a new image, and you did so without permission from the owner of the original image. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 9:52am
|
If I took any of your pixelart and photographed it nd just tweaked a bit of the hue or took one of your pixels and converted to vectors and just smoothed the weirdest bits it would be plagiarism.
I liked the pixel and you did a great job but you just crossed the line into plagiarism. This applies to the John Lennon even tho you did alter the BG from the original. Every art is its own thing and viewed on its own merit only. ------------- |
Posted By: StoneStephenT
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 12:16pm
|
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 1:17pm
| Accuse a man in something without clear evidence. That's cool! |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 2:54pm
|
Please try to understand that this is nothing personal and the evidence is quite clear in showing that the breaks in color, composition and every element lines up perfectly to the original. Most if not all pixel clusters are in the exact same place.
This is plagiarizing the original artist.  ------------- |
Posted By: StoneStephenT
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 2:55pm
scwol, I’ve looked at the thumbnail of your “fall” piece (as it’s all I have to go on) and the reference photo you required. It’s clear that you tried to recreate that photo point-for-point as best you could. While I commend you on your ability to do so—I gave your piece a high rating when it was active—you didn’t try to remix or transform the image into something you could uniquely call your own. Here’s a pic from PJ user Smilecythe that was posted earlier this year. Note that while Smilecythe used photo references for the character portraits, he both stylized the portraits and used them as part of a larger piece that parodies character select screens from the Streets of Rage series.  cure's "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Redneck" falls along similar lines: rather than re-create the entire reference photo, cure re-creates the centerpiece of the photo, then adds a new background to it. He would later http://pixeljoint.com/pixelart/98763.htm - remake his own work with a new background and some edits to the main sprite. Using reference pieces isn’t a necessarily bad thing. Trying to recreate them in pixel art can even be good practice. But if I’m reading the tea leaves correctly, PJ would rather you use those references as a jumping-off point for creating your own works and finding your own style, not to show off how well you can recreate a photograph. |
Posted By: jalonso
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 3:02pm
|
Originally posted by StoneStephenT
...But if I’m reading the tea leaves correctly, PJ would rather you use those references as a jumping-off point for creating your own works and finding your own style, not to show off how well you can recreate a photograph. This is nothing to do with PJ. Artistic ethics is its own thing in all mediums. ------------- |
Posted By: StoneStephenT
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 3:15pm
| In fairness, I’d posted that before you posted that comparison GIF. My statement still stands, but…yikes, that GIF is damning. |
Posted By: Manupix
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:30pm
|
Originally posted by scwol Accuse a man in something without clear evidence. That's cool! Evidence #1: google reverse image search finds the originals of both this and the Lennon image. This just doesn't happen with hand made copies, even traced ones. Evidence #2: resizing the ref image to 100px wide makes it 66px high, just like yours. Ok this isn't damning, it just adds up. Evidence #3: to complement jal's gif, here's a comparison gif between your piece and a 16 color reduction of the downsized original. Exact same colors; many similar clusters. All the hard work already done for you: now that's what's cool!  |
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:31pm
|
If I will draw main street of my town, will you remove my art cause street does not belongs to me? As for pixel art my art fits all the rules, and if you are strict about copyright, let's remove all art which has material registered by any company.
Even if author against the fact that I used his material (photo in the public access), I would like to see his personal written request to me. By the way, I did not draw for a commercial purpose. So I have got right to draw, don't I? P.S. I wont write any more ironic words. Let's clear the situation. My art with John Winston Ono Lennon had as you say "original" background. So why it was removed? Art "Fall" fits all pixel art rules and denying it with plagiarizing just breaks my rights. Very intresting to look at yours double standards. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:35pm
|
I don't hide fact that I used "Index Color Mode" to create my palette.
|
Posted By: DawnBringer
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:48pm
| scwol: Realize that in this case it's more about plagiarism than the reproduction process. You were honest about the source and put a fair (well, some) amount of manual work into it. Had this picture been based on your own photograph/art, it would probably have been approved. Works based on other artists material suffers a great reduction in approval tolerance. |
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:52pm
|
"Works based on other artists material suffers a great reduction in approval tolerance." There are so many arts which are using other artist's materials. Who creates rules for approving and why they are not clear?
Edit: I knew, befor posting, that my art can be not aprooved. But I saw that there are arts which are made with same steps I did. Administration even aprooved my art and I was on first page of monthly top. So I thought everything is OK. |
Posted By: DawnBringer
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 4:56pm
| Please don't try to make a "two wrongs make a right" defence, it's just annoying. |
Posted By: scwol
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 5:06pm
|
My last post in this topic. Administration proved that I am wrong, there is no need to discuss anything here. I will just remove my art and next time will use other technique
and post only original art. I am sorry. Just having bad days and acted as fool. |
Posted By: jeremy
Date Posted: 22 November 2015 at 5:43pm
To reiterate, it's important that you're honest about your process. Manupix had to provide the references for both pieces, and you straight up lied about how you pixelled Fall – that says to me that you knew what you did was wrong, and tried to cover it up.
Sorry to belabour the point, and I'm glad you better understand pixeljoint's rules around this stuff now. |