- P L A G I A R I S M -

[kpopchild]

Why don't we just stop calling it "filtering".

I'd settle for "sparkly line swirl thingies" any day. Won't make a damn difference anyway cause it's not a matter of life and death should a person call it what they want. Someone could write a book on the history and coming-of Soompi artworks with a most interesting analysis of graphic ontology, aesthetics, cultural and social influences, and the new and the old with regards to art and style. Might become a bestseller.

Apparently, every other thing is also known as a "texture" nowadays - but only on Soompi forums. But that's a topic for a rainy day. =]

[Guest midst]

Where are you saranghae012? You havent been here for weeks now, regarding my PM i sent you, it is too late to reprimand the member whom had broken the rules as he/she has changed their signature. This person has gotten away with breaking the rules.

I'm disappointed. If you knew you werent going to be here for a certain amount of time you should have gotten someone to be temporary moderator to this forum...

[Aziraphale]

Where are you saranghae012? You havent been here for weeks now, regarding my PM i sent you, it is too late to reprimand the member whom had broken the rules as he/she has changed their signature. This person has gotten away with breaking the rules.

I'm disappointed. If you knew you werent going to be here for a certain amount of time you should have gotten someone to be temporary moderator to this forum...

You can PM another moderator next time if Chelly is unable to respond to your PM.

[Guest lucky*13]

What if you use a texture from a website?

--Christy.

[Guest aoura.]

^ As long as you credit the website you should be fine. ^^

[Guest lucky*13]

Okay, icic. (:

--Christy.

[Guest mr. lovely]

Not crediting is considered stealing which is plagiarism right? *__*;

I've been noticing people who credit resources to Google. Which isn't really crediting, since you can search anything on Google and call it a day. And crediting to dA, without any usernames and whatnot. I'm guilty of the latter, but I do try my best to name the specific dA's I get resources from.

Ahhhhh, and I remember browsing the stock thread, and seeing a lot of photography (plus a bit of digital art, for things like galaxy images and whatnot) from deviant art in there. Um, unless the image is in the stock section of dA, it's not considered a stock. So by using other people's photography not meant for others' use, that's stealing O____________O;

Right? Right? T___T; -desperately trying to make a point-

[Guest photodaisy]

^Yes, it's stealing. No crediting is stealing. And yes, it's plagiarizing. For example, if you don't link to your resources, you're basically claiming the image and the brushes and the textures you used as yours. It is not, so it is plagiarism.

And I think people just naturally forget the names of deviantART members in which they've used graphics from. o___o;; I've learned to name my brushes and textures after the the username/website. o___o;; So you really can't do anything except tell Saranghae012 to modify the rules and say, "Make sure you SPECIFICALLY credit your resources...blah blah blah." Until then, I suggest if you spot any, just tell them explicitly that they SHOULD specifically identify who, from dA did they take the resource from (same goes for the Google ordeal).

But then again, it'd be like forcing them to name the font they used on the site or which user from SXC did they use for the picture in their graphic or same goes for the Soompi Stock Thread. They'd have to say who was the one who posted the image up, where the image was from, and blah blah blah.

A cycle, a cycle, a repetitious semi-cycle.

[Guest mr. lovely]

^ But I think if they really wanted to make an effort to credit properly, then the "credits: google, dA, lj" thing wouldn't happen as often.

Laziness gets the best of us =\ But I don't think it's that hard to bookmark the site or whatever to remember it. It may not seem like such a big deal to the person who's using the resource, but it is to the person who made the resource.

[Guest habibi]

^ I'm completely guilty of the Google credit part. I have a forgetful memory and I do try to remember.. I only post up that only if I can't remember it x__x. I tried to save it on notepad (the site links) and I'd even bookmark it, but I'm not the only one that uses the comp and my bro tends to delete stuffs.

I make so dang sense

[lilchan]

^thats why i have a resource post on my livejournal..a list of resources, so whenever i download something, i add it to my list..XDDD...

so for crediting, I just link to that post

[Guest w.shinyz_tard>3]

thanks for the best posting

everyone must to know that

and shouldn't like person 2

thanks a lot / sir

^__________________--^

[faithx]

Hey, I just realized that if you see a graphic with the same style, you could check the date it was made in the properties to determine who made it first? But it could be a little risky because it could've been the latest banner the original stylist made.

--Vanilla s2.

[Guest touche`]

^ you know, it's kind of funny that I see the same style from FOUR different person. To me, the date seem kind of uncreadible because what if the person made the banner before but didn't post it until later on. Others could have thought they copy their style first.. I think I'm saying it right..

[kpopchild]

if you guys wanna talk about crediting to the first layer of crediting, then we'd all be crediting every creator and contributor who works for Adobe to invent the program software photoshop, as well as the manufacturer of our computers and everyone a part of it, the photographer of the original images and the entire photoshoot team who worked for the shoot, the people who created the internet, etc etc etc. it's just one bloody mess in the end. we credit what is essential. not all resources require crediting, and not all sources are blatantly in their original form by the time a person is done with it (say a brush or texture). crediting should be a strict rule, no doubt, but i think we should consider the extent of uses and intent of artist (experimental, non-commercial, tribute, etc.) to evaluate if it is demanded and absolutely necessary; in other words, be smart and reasonable. crediting, in this case, is as complex and maybe even controversial as the abortion issue. -__-

[jj.exot5ia]

truthfully what my interpretations on 'style' is quite different. I think, there are only ONLY so many styles out there. And there are ONLY so many ways to filter. I mean seriously, if you say that everything is copying style we could all say HEY we're all copying the first person to think of filtering in a graphic O.O that's a mess (kinda like what kpopchild said) But the thing is, it's really annoying me where SOOOOOOOO many people are like HEYYY HEYYY so and so just copied so and so, and the bashing =_=ll what happened to friendliness? I see some people that put brushes/shapes of stars/leaves/lines in their banners and when someone else does it, it's like BOOOM PLAGIARISM!!! I just don't see it, it's not like the person who put it in first OWNS the shape, so just because someone put it in first, no one else is ever EVER allowed to put it in either?? Or when someone chooses a specific color choice, or brightness that's just similar to someone. . .

that just bothering me :tongue2:

-Rebecca

[Guest mr. lovely]

^ When you pick things apart like that, like the individual shapes and colors, of course it wouldn't seem like copying. But when those colors and those shapes are put together in a certain way, they happen to have the same "feel" as somebody else's stuff. And I guess that's copying? Just what I think @_@;

[Guest au6ust_x92]

Hey! I'm new member !

I think in art work might have repeated the style but in this artwork sees to resemble too. =_=

.Oh !I have already agree <3

{Sorry for wrong language =O= hae !}

[Guest yumi-chan]

Holy smack, there is so much argument about the whole plagiarism thing o3o *dives right in*

Anyway, my filthy two cents:

Similarities in style aren't plagiarism. The whole idea of the swirly filters, tiny sparkles and the blobs gradients are of a style which is a result of inspiration (can't think of calling it anything else, but that's everyone's excuse) or plain copying. Plagiarizing would be taking someone's graphic/banner and like 'OMG, that's such a pretty texture, i'll recycle it in my graphic and maybe he/she won't know' since you don't want to bother learning it yourself. D: lol.

It's a bother to see that this forum only has a few 'originals' while the rest all look the same to the point where I can't tell the different between them; but you can't report someone for using the same style, etc since it's technically not wrong. (you can rant about it somewhere, sure XD) Old Soompi had a lot of various styles, but due to time going on, people moving on and new people coming in: the cycle does it's job >_>; (I hope you get what I mean, because I don't XD) And pointing fingers and namedropping won't work out the problem.

I don't know about the whole image crediting thing though since a lot of my stuff comes off sxc.hu O3O Yet I tend to use DA resources if the users allows downloads, or if it's made for PSing and all that jazz. But if it's like, say, a abstract texture that the user made purely as 'art' and not 'texture/free use' I don't touch it, since it's quite wrong--even if you do credit them, etc, etc, it's better to ask the owner first.

Hrm. Yeah, that's all. Sorry, I wanted so sound somewhat smart. D:

[Guest stoked!]

i think it would be hard to draw conclusions from such topic for not all of us have the same outlook and definitions on plagiarism. && it's very hard to be unique in style these days because one, sometimes no matter how one tries to make a new style it ends up having something similar to another person's style one way or another and two, some people learn so fast these days. ( not that i`m blaming or complaining ) ^^

edit!

oh yeah, i always wondered back then as to why people call the swirly lines filtering because when i looked up in the dictionary as to what really filtering means, it's definition was quite far away from swirly things and etc. XD