deviant art

Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
[x]
more ▶

Featured in Groups:

Details

December 18, 2004
Link
Thumb

Statistics

Comments: 24
Favourites: 0
Views: 206 (0 today)
[x]
NEWS
I was very disapointed of some artists, when I saw that they use real images like Hubble photos to create images they call their own. I think an artist is someone who makes art by himself and not a person who collects photos, pastes them on a shape and calls it something like "Supernebula".
And some of these artists REALLY have a name on DA.
Ah, and the most stupid people are the rippers. I cant say how I hate this shit.
I dont want to say any names but everybody who reads this should think about what he should do or not to concerning his OWN art.


Member of:
:iconspaceartists: :iconinner-space: :iconthree-:


greetings
Ov3RMinD
Add a Comment:
 
:iconcosmicbound:
True in aspect, everything is art; however not crediting & also dismissing the fact of used photo's (that aren't free stock especially) is quite in the wrong :P If someone was though to use some photo's, if they had permission, it would be best they post their art in the photomanipulations category, since they didnt wholly paint it.

I am also curious like Annis, if you would please notify me who you think these people might be (only out of curiousity), or atleast tell me if im one of them. :P (which i would hope im not, considering i dont use stock all that often, i use stock textures for my planets [because i dont have a camera], but thats about it really, once when i was like uber-noob i played around with a hubble picture, but i never did it again & it was more of an experiment rather than a serious posting of art)
Reply
:iconov3rmind:
I also use stock textures to make planets, cuz its normally impossible to see the used texture. But I never use space pictures to create space. Like a Hubble nebula. That is what I was mainly talking about.
And you are not one of them, either. ;)
Reply
:iconcosmicbound:
:)

yeah, its not really art when someone just copies... i suppose if it was extensively edited they could put it in photomanipulations. (that atleast, if they where to actually even submit it)
Reply
:iconzingzangzoom:
~zingzangzoom Dec 19, 2004   Digital Artist
i made those hubble models!



from scratch!



i swear!
Reply
:iconwillyb246:
Yea, I agree. In music it`s the same way. Unless
you give the credit back for what you took. If not
then you are not an artist! Didn`t Bill Gates once
say, "good artists copy, great artists steal????"
Reply
:iconcmorrell:
~cmorrell Dec 19, 2004  Professional Photographer
Why do YOU feel the need to define what an artist is or isn't?

You don't like it, fine that's your choice, that doesn't give you the right to claim they're not artists.
Reply
:iconov3rmind:
I didn't say that. I just explained how I see this situation.
Reply
:iconcmorrell:
~cmorrell Dec 19, 2004  Professional Photographer
"I think an artist is someone who makes art by himself and not a person who collects photos, pastes them on a shape and calls it something like "Supernebula"."

Actually you did say that, perhaps you didn't mean exactly what you said, but that's all I can go on.
Reply
:iconov3rmind:
I said just my opinion, and not that it has to be like that.
If your opinion is different, I dont have any problems with that.
Reply
:iconfusion-light:
~Fusion-light Dec 19, 2004  Professional Interface Designer
:) i know who also
Reply
Add a Comment: