Hi all! I was wondering if somebody wanted to try their hand at Baldurizing any (or all, if you have the time and interest) of these ladies?
@paul_leone: Though it's not the same photo, one of the NPC portraits I made for DSotSC (Keiria) used Laetitia Casta as the model. I'll add one or two of the others to my growing library of possible models, but I have so many now that I sometimes just stare at them and wonder what I should do...
@BlueSorceress You're right, that would be perfect for Aerie! I've had trouble finding a good picture because a lot of blonde elf portraits don't have the right expression, being too seductive or too cheerful. That one has a very Aerie-like expression of wonder.
Anydoby have any good paladin/knight portrait to suggest.
There have been some good paladin and knighty portraits posted in this thread but they're rather too.... malemodelish, to my taste. Im not looking for a pretty boy, or a ugly s.o.b for that matter.
What im looking for is more like a rugged battleworn face with some armor peeking on the picture. Keldorn from BG2 is a perfect example of what i mean. But someone younger.
There is no "problem". I simply don't like having a 20 hours work undone by someone on the same forum not even asking.
I think it's a huge difference between taking bits and pieces from all over the net and then creating something different and unique from it, and taking that very same end result, modifying it slightly and then posting it on the exact same forum under your own name. But maybe I'm just oldfashioned.
I would have let it go (already had in fact) if not for the picture appearing again. There is no hard feelings here, I'm just expressing my point of view, just as you do yours.
Anydoby have any good paladin/knight portrait to suggest.
There have been some good paladin and knighty portraits posted in this thread but they're rather too.... malemodelish, to my taste. Im not looking for a pretty boy, or a ugly s.o.b for that matter.
What im looking for is more like a rugged battleworn face with some armor peeking on the picture. Keldorn from BG2 is a perfect example of what i mean. But someone younger.
@Tzar@Astafas - Bad analogy using Bob Dylan. I'm pretty sure anyone who has ever covered one of his songs and earned any kind of money would have had to pay either Bob Dylan or his record company a decent amount of royalties.
I think @Dee has already pointed out (as have I) that copyright can be a serious issue in threads such as this. It's all fine and wonderful thinking that artists should collaborate and share there work, allowing it to be edited in any way shape or form, but it doesn't actually work like that.
Think about it: If Kim Kardashian has grounds to sue (under image copyrights) a company because they hired an actress for their advertisements who looks slightly like her, what do you think can happen if you start messing with other peoples art then posting it online?
It's usually a question of permission, and most artists would be relatively cool with others using their art if permission is asked and credit is given. Nobody cares if it's for private use, but as soon as you post it online it leaves it open for other people to edit, and other people until finally the original artist is almost lost. Believe it or not, posting artwork on the internet does not make it fair game. All that has to be shown is a) Can you prove you created the original piece, and b) can you prove they stole it.
Imagine if this was pen and paper art, in an art class. Would you take someone else's work from their desk, scan it into a computer, edit it and then show everyone the hard work you've done?
I hope the above doesn't come across as me being rude in anyway, as it's not my intention. I've had to sit through a number of copyrighting courses in past jobs so I think I'm in a good place to convey the severity of copyright infringement. People can get into an awful lot of trouble for it.
@Astafas what's the problem anyway? You edited someone's photograph of someone in the first place! What about THEIR rights?
You did hell of a job, it's a great portrait, and community thanks you and respects you. But why is it wrong if someone customizes something further? It doesn't automatically mean that your work is inferior! If there were 100 modified versions of your work - all the better! You should consider it an honor if someone finds your work so interesting and close to heart that (s)he actually spends time developing it further! That way new ideas will evolve and everyone will benefit. If you want civilization to prosper - you must never stop the development of art & culture...
I believe artists should always collaborate and work together instead of giving in to vanity and pride.
Imagine you're Bob Dylan - would you feel bad because another artist made a cover of Knockin' On Heaven's Door? Some artists that covered it: Eric Clapton, Def Leppard, Guns 'N' Roses, Avril Lavigne, Bob Marley, Pink Floyd, Roger Waters, U2... No - you'd be greatly honored!
@Astafas - you're Bob Dylan, @vierrae is Pink Floyd (pun intended) - each artist has something specific and each art is beautiful in its own way - WORK TOGETHER!!!
Peace
@Tzar This is a bit of a grey area, but on the whole, I gotta agree with @Astafas.
Artists spend a great deal of time and effort to produce these wonderful works that greatly enhance our Baldur's Gate experience, and ask for nothing (financially) in return. The least we can do is to respect their work and give the credit and recognition they deserve.
If Astafas was selling his Neera picture, then he would probably need to obtain rights from the legal owner of the image, which is probably the modelling firm that took that picture. But what Astafas did was to use an image that is widely available in the public sphere, and applied a great deal of work to make it something completely different and unique. So your comparison is not really valid.
If another artist makes minor modifications to Astafas’ work, he/she should acknowledge the original artist when sharing their work. It is something we could all do better at.
@LadyRhian is exceptionally good in always crediting the artists for many of the works she showcases, and sometimes even providing links to Deviantart pages, this has allowed me to search out other works by the same artists, and find stuff I like even better.
The rest of us would do well to emulate her. Like Astafas should have credited @Nixxi for that amazing Aerie picture, and I should have made a note of where I downloaded the knight picture I just posted earlier.
I sometimes download pictures I like as I find them, and if the file name does not indicate the name of the artist, I quickly forget who it was, which is not great, but obviously I did not say or even imply that it was my work.
I have vague ambitions of being a writer, and I have occasionally shared some writing online. I would be extremely peeved if somebody made only minor editions to my work, like changing names and the ending, and then shared the work as their own. Even if somebody made no changes, and instead made a compilation of works, for example "Tales of Eastern Fantasy in English", and included my work without crediting me, I would not be very happy about it, regardless of whether such a compilation was ever published or made any sales.
Credit the ORIGINAL artist, if the artwork is changed a lot by yourself, you should add a link to the original piece. As for minor changes, just credit the original artist, and be kind to mention what changes you have made.
I was a bit surprised by the lack of enthusiasm on this thread for my new Tiefling - he took me for ever to make and I hold him as my best work yet (thanks to @Meepitchi for your like though!). However, when you have the speed up...
Neera is a great character, both in BG1 and BG2. A long, compelling and rewarding story, and a romance at that! But her picture?! Seriously? I was so disappointed when I first saw it, and it hasn't felt better since. Apparently I'm not the only one, as both @vierrae and @So_Low made a request from a photo I'd never seen earlier. I gave it my second best shot (as the Tiefling is still my best)!
It is time for you to meet the new, sexy and often quite dangerous Wild Mage Neera:
As you hopefully notice, I've tried to stay true to the original when possible. I thought a tattered robe perfect for a Mage prone to "accidents". The pattern is not exactly the same as in the original, but it's there.
Her ear isn't visible but I've made sure to make her eye more elven (and much less drugged). The background has a wild magic/static electricity-quality to it, and all the colors are roughly the same. I've left the cropping up to you though, as people seem to have very different preferences there.
@Astafas Your Neera portrait is indeed beautiful. But it's also true that there are certain points, which could be significantly improved with a retouch.
I agree with you that the angle of the almond-shaped eye is perfect for an half-elf. It's just that its brightness makes the eyeball appear unnaturally large for this kind of head size. That's easily fixed with some shadows though. Personally, I'm not fond of the background at all due to the cyberpunk vibe I get from it. But that's purely a matter of taste and nothing more. However, the pose you've chosen for her looks very painful to behold. It would take a flexible body indeed to overtwist the neck in such a manner. Truly, I tried this pose a couple of minutes ago and now suffer from muscle aches all around the neck region. X( Last but not least, the overall impression of being a wild mage would vastly improve if she was holding a staff in her hands. Although, placing said staff plus hands in a anatomic correct manner to this kind of pose is quite difficult to pull off, if not impossible.
I've modified your portrait as an example to outline what I just wrote above. The segue between hair and background leaves to be desired, I know. And the placement of her hands could also be done a lot better. But I hope you still catch my drift.
As you hopefully see my intention of doing so was not to take credit from you, or posting it as my own work. But to solely give visual tips and suggestions of how you could improve your work. I was actually happy seeing that you took my suggestions into account when you remastered this particular portrait a day later. But reading your current posts here, maybe I should have remained silent 8 pages ago.
A quick run down on copyright infringement rules (if I remember correctly) for those who don't know:
If a photograph or likeness is used for a particular modification, then permission should be granted or in the very least credit must be given to the photographer, OR the person being photographed (depending on who owns the rights to the photograph). You'd find most famous people will have their own image rights, whereas models, or average Joe would usually hand theirs over to the photographer.
If the photograph has been edited to the point it can no longer be called the photographers, or even the person who is being photographed then the rules relax a little. If it becomes your own work in it's own right then the only time credit/royalties will usually be asked for is if money is gained from the piece. Artist's/Photographers generally don't care if the work is so different it no longer matters and they're not losing out on money.
It also becomes an issue when the photographer/artist tries to sell their work. If their photograph or painting has been taken and only slightly edited before being reposted online there is once again financial issues impacting on copyrights. If the edit in anyway impedes the artists/photographers ability to make money, the person making the editing will be in a whole lot of trouble. This is an issue with taking artwork from DeviantArt as the website offers a printing service allowing the artist to make money from their art. Be careful.
There is no numerical percentage indicated in a court of law to what defines 'sufficiently edited'. Instead, what they try to acknowledge is 'Substantial similarity.' You can infringe this EVEN if the edit wasn't actually an edit at all, but a sketch.
For example: If you draw an excellent sketch of recent artwork, and then start to sell it/claim it as your own: you are still very much in breach of copyright. The rule of 'substantial similarity' will once again come into play.
I might be wrong on this, but I think the rule is that anything over 70 years old is fair game. Which is why you find the Mona Lisa's beautiful mug imprinted on every single jigsaw or poster in museums across the world.
I know @Heindrich1988 said that this is a bit of a grey area, but I disagree on this point. I think it's very black and white. If you don't have permission to use a piece of art/photograph then either ask for permission, give credit where it's due or don't post anything up at all. Failing that, then edit it beyond all recognition, so you can officially call the piece your own. Even then would I still credit the original artist.
Beyond the courts and laws, it's pretty much an issue of morality. It is quite simply: not very nice. Someone spends 60-80 hours painting a picture, for someone to come along and paint all over it within an hour and post it up under their own name. Some artists do not have the financial backing to take every single person to court who tries to edit their work. All they can do is ask websites politely if they can take down the edits. This usually leaves these images open to stealing (which it is - stealing) and eventually every single piece of art posted on DeviantArt or other websites will have the name of the artist embossed in GIGANTIC big letters diagonally across the piece.
@Kamigoroshi, we have no issue here. :-) I was only very surprised when @Tzar posted your sketch (I didn't even recall who had made it) instead of the "original". I found it a bit sad to have put so much effort into it, and then find a brief sketch live on in its stead.
@Heindrich1988, I didn't know the artist was actually present on this forum. I will edit my post accordingly. It should however be clear that I in no way tried to take credit myself, as her signature is present along with my praises. :-)
Hi all! I was wondering if somebody wanted to try their hand at Baldurizing any (or all, if you have the time and interest) of these ladies?
@paul_leone: Though it's not the same photo, one of the NPC portraits I made for DSotSC (Keiria) used Laetitia Casta as the model. I'll add one or two of the others to my growing library of possible models, but I have so many now that I sometimes just stare at them and wonder what I should do...
I saw - and I'm going to use Keiria as my bard portrait when I get around to her - but can one ever really have enough Laetitia Casta? I understand that you're swamped with models, though!
Thats definitelly a step to right direction imo. Slighty too feminine figure to my taste tho. Otherwise that picture contains everything i meant. In the end i would still use that over most of the calvin klein model portraits posted here.
Especially like that hint of a scar on his nose and those dents on his armor. They're not conspicuous but still noticable. Looks like someone who has actually seen combat.
Deviantart has some nice paladin/knight/armored warrior pictures that would make awesome paladin portraits. I dont dare to post them here tho.
You came to this wonderful thread with a request, which @vierrae very kindly satisfied.
You then did something that was (at the very least) disrespectful to another valued artist who contributed a lot to this thread, and as a result, he brought it to your attention. You then decided to disagree with him, and thus I and a few other members of the forum who frequent this thread politely reminded you of the legal and moral norms in this situation.
Instead of acknowledging your mistake, you reply with snarky sarcasm and further disrespect? And potentially putting at risk this amazing thread at so many artists have dedicate so much time, effort and talent in building into the premier resource on the internet for Baldurised portraits!
I am sorry but you have lost my respect. What are you? 10 years old? You think you’re cool cos you “don’t give a shit about laws?” What about common decency and basic courtesy?
I would like to remind everyone that this site is PG-13; please adhere to the site rules regarding post content.
Also, copyright is not an ethical gray area; infringing on someone's copyright claims is wrong, and it's against site rules.
We may need to look at creating a better resource for posting custom portraits, but for now this thread has become too unwieldy to moderate effectively. Feel free to start a new one, but this thread is closed.
Comments
There have been some good paladin and knighty portraits posted in this thread but they're rather too.... malemodelish, to my taste. Im not looking for a pretty boy, or a ugly s.o.b for that matter.
What im looking for is more like a rugged battleworn face with some armor peeking on the picture. Keldorn from BG2 is a perfect example of what i mean. But someone younger.
I think it's a huge difference between taking bits and pieces from all over the net and then creating something different and unique from it, and taking that very same end result, modifying it slightly and then posting it on the exact same forum under your own name. But maybe I'm just oldfashioned.
I would have let it go (already had in fact) if not for the picture appearing again. There is no hard feelings here, I'm just expressing my point of view, just as you do yours.
Maybe something like this?
I think @Dee has already pointed out (as have I) that copyright can be a serious issue in threads such as this. It's all fine and wonderful thinking that artists should collaborate and share there work, allowing it to be edited in any way shape or form, but it doesn't actually work like that.
Think about it: If Kim Kardashian has grounds to sue (under image copyrights) a company because they hired an actress for their advertisements who looks slightly like her, what do you think can happen if you start messing with other peoples art then posting it online?
It's usually a question of permission, and most artists would be relatively cool with others using their art if permission is asked and credit is given. Nobody cares if it's for private use, but as soon as you post it online it leaves it open for other people to edit, and other people until finally the original artist is almost lost. Believe it or not, posting artwork on the internet does not make it fair game. All that has to be shown is a) Can you prove you created the original piece, and b) can you prove they stole it.
Imagine if this was pen and paper art, in an art class. Would you take someone else's work from their desk, scan it into a computer, edit it and then show everyone the hard work you've done?
I hope the above doesn't come across as me being rude in anyway, as it's not my intention. I've had to sit through a number of copyrighting courses in past jobs so I think I'm in a good place to convey the severity of copyright infringement. People can get into an awful lot of trouble for it.
This is a bit of a grey area, but on the whole, I gotta agree with @Astafas.
Artists spend a great deal of time and effort to produce these wonderful works that greatly enhance our Baldur's Gate experience, and ask for nothing (financially) in return. The least we can do is to respect their work and give the credit and recognition they deserve.
If Astafas was selling his Neera picture, then he would probably need to obtain rights from the legal owner of the image, which is probably the modelling firm that took that picture. But what Astafas did was to use an image that is widely available in the public sphere, and applied a great deal of work to make it something completely different and unique. So your comparison is not really valid.
If another artist makes minor modifications to Astafas’ work, he/she should acknowledge the original artist when sharing their work. It is something we could all do better at.
@LadyRhian is exceptionally good in always crediting the artists for many of the works she showcases, and sometimes even providing links to Deviantart pages, this has allowed me to search out other works by the same artists, and find stuff I like even better.
The rest of us would do well to emulate her. Like Astafas should have credited @Nixxi for that amazing Aerie picture, and I should have made a note of where I downloaded the knight picture I just posted earlier.
I sometimes download pictures I like as I find them, and if the file name does not indicate the name of the artist, I quickly forget who it was, which is not great, but obviously I did not say or even imply that it was my work.
I have vague ambitions of being a writer, and I have occasionally shared some writing online. I would be extremely peeved if somebody made only minor editions to my work, like changing names and the ending, and then shared the work as their own. Even if somebody made no changes, and instead made a compilation of works, for example "Tales of Eastern Fantasy in English", and included my work without crediting me, I would not be very happy about it, regardless of whether such a compilation was ever published or made any sales.
If a photograph or likeness is used for a particular modification, then permission should be granted or in the very least credit must be given to the photographer, OR the person being photographed (depending on who owns the rights to the photograph). You'd find most famous people will have their own image rights, whereas models, or average Joe would usually hand theirs over to the photographer.
If the photograph has been edited to the point it can no longer be called the photographers, or even the person who is being photographed then the rules relax a little. If it becomes your own work in it's own right then the only time credit/royalties will usually be asked for is if money is gained from the piece. Artist's/Photographers generally don't care if the work is so different it no longer matters and they're not losing out on money.
It also becomes an issue when the photographer/artist tries to sell their work. If their photograph or painting has been taken and only slightly edited before being reposted online there is once again financial issues impacting on copyrights. If the edit in anyway impedes the artists/photographers ability to make money, the person making the editing will be in a whole lot of trouble. This is an issue with taking artwork from DeviantArt as the website offers a printing service allowing the artist to make money from their art. Be careful.
There is no numerical percentage indicated in a court of law to what defines 'sufficiently edited'. Instead, what they try to acknowledge is 'Substantial similarity.' You can infringe this EVEN if the edit wasn't actually an edit at all, but a sketch.
For example: If you draw an excellent sketch of recent artwork, and then start to sell it/claim it as your own: you are still very much in breach of copyright. The rule of 'substantial similarity' will once again come into play.
I might be wrong on this, but I think the rule is that anything over 70 years old is fair game. Which is why you find the Mona Lisa's beautiful mug imprinted on every single jigsaw or poster in museums across the world.
I know @Heindrich1988 said that this is a bit of a grey area, but I disagree on this point. I think it's very black and white. If you don't have permission to use a piece of art/photograph then either ask for permission, give credit where it's due or don't post anything up at all. Failing that, then edit it beyond all recognition, so you can officially call the piece your own. Even then would I still credit the original artist.
Beyond the courts and laws, it's pretty much an issue of morality. It is quite simply: not very nice. Someone spends 60-80 hours painting a picture, for someone to come along and paint all over it within an hour and post it up under their own name. Some artists do not have the financial backing to take every single person to court who tries to edit their work. All they can do is ask websites politely if they can take down the edits. This usually leaves these images open to stealing (which it is - stealing) and eventually every single piece of art posted on DeviantArt or other websites will have the name of the artist embossed in GIGANTIC big letters diagonally across the piece.
@Heindrich1988, I didn't know the artist was actually present on this forum. I will edit my post accordingly. It should however be clear that I in no way tried to take credit myself, as her signature is present along with my praises. :-)
Especially like that hint of a scar on his nose and those dents on his armor. They're not conspicuous but still noticable. Looks like someone who has actually seen combat.
Deviantart has some nice paladin/knight/armored warrior pictures that would make awesome paladin portraits. I dont dare to post them here tho.
Please adhere to the site rules. This site is PG-13.
All credit goes to @Astafas for I am but insignificant dust...You are unbelievable...
You came to this wonderful thread with a request, which @vierrae very kindly satisfied.
You then did something that was (at the very least) disrespectful to another valued artist who contributed a lot to this thread, and as a result, he brought it to your attention. You then decided to disagree with him, and thus I and a few other members of the forum who frequent this thread politely reminded you of the legal and moral norms in this situation.
Instead of acknowledging your mistake, you reply with snarky sarcasm and further disrespect? And potentially putting at risk this amazing thread at so many artists have dedicate so much time, effort and talent in building into the premier resource on the internet for Baldurised portraits!
I am sorry but you have lost my respect. What are you? 10 years old? You think you’re cool cos you “don’t give a shit about laws?” What about common decency and basic courtesy?
Also, copyright is not an ethical gray area; infringing on someone's copyright claims is wrong, and it's against site rules.
We may need to look at creating a better resource for posting custom portraits, but for now this thread has become too unwieldy to moderate effectively. Feel free to start a new one, but this thread is closed.