@Shandyr Maybe I missed something but in this thread not a single mod(der) is named or publicly shamed? Not by Buttercheese, that is. On the contrary, I understood that she opened this thread because asking modders secretely to account for copyrighted materials was getting a bit out of hand by the sheer number of incidents.
No, I was just stating my impression, but I do agree that I am late to the thread and didn't see things that might have / went on before (I did read the thread, though).
From many of your posts I get the feeling you have the urge to openly punish people who don't give credit properly.
Just the ones who are being lazy and disrespectful about it. "Talk shit, get hit" basically.
Like the case with that topic you mentioned just now. The user in question clearly didn't give a flying hoot. It's about sending a clear message that this kind of stuff is not going to be tolerated.
But yeah, I get it. Forum peace and all that jazz.
Regarding credits in forum posts, I may have something insightful to say about its actual effectiveness.
Google Chrome has a right-click option of "Search Google for image" for images, which equals to "lift a finger" amount of effort to find the source/author, in a very literal sense. Meaning, if I wasn't interested in it enough to make a single right-click, I'm not likely to click the provided link either, making it obsolete. Conversely, I do find it really nice and convenient when Youtube uploaders post links to the images used, because then I'd have to take a screenshot, crop it in Paint, upload to image search service - definitely more effort than lifting a finger, which may be enough to bar some people from giving a try. Same goes for character portraits in mods.
Obviously, it's only true if you're cool about letting Chrome mine your private data for governments and ads agencies (still most popular browser though, or so I heard), but the idea of minimal effort required to track the source is something to give consideration to imo.
Now, what I've used in my own personal games, I haven't contacted the artists. I've modified some of the originals (5 if you want to count just cropping a wallpaper rather than actual image manipulation) and stick in my own games, haven't contacted the artists. Because of private personal use I figure I'm fine so far.
But, now I would like to post the picture combining them all, and now I seek permission from the original artists before I publicly post it. And I haven't gotten a reply from any of them in a week. I don't know how to even get in contact with Plasmocat, who has not logged for years into G3 where her portrait pack is hosted. I got a response and approval from the person for whom one of the modified portraits was made of her character, that's as close as I've gotten.
Unless expressly stated otherwise, I consider dedicated portrait mods made by an artist to be a "mod" thing rather than "portrait", and mods are governed by the modding community's standards.
That said, it appears neither Plasmocat nor Enkida used to be particularly welcome about that, at least in the past. So there you go, I guess. For shame...
Now, what I've used in my own personal games, I haven't contacted the artists. I've modified some of the originals (5 if you want to count just cropping a wallpaper rather than actual image manipulation) and stick in my own games, haven't contacted the artists. Because of private personal use I figure I'm fine so far.
This is fine because you used it for your own fun.
Comments
Not by Buttercheese, that is. On the contrary, I understood that she opened this thread because asking modders secretely to account for copyrighted materials was getting a bit out of hand by the sheer number of incidents.
"Talk shit, get hit" basically.
Like the case with that topic you mentioned just now.
The user in question clearly didn't give a flying hoot.
It's about sending a clear message that this kind of stuff is not going to be tolerated.
But yeah, I get it. Forum peace and all that jazz.
Google Chrome has a right-click option of "Search Google for image" for images, which equals to "lift a finger" amount of effort to find the source/author, in a very literal sense. Meaning, if I wasn't interested in it enough to make a single right-click, I'm not likely to click the provided link either, making it obsolete.
Conversely, I do find it really nice and convenient when Youtube uploaders post links to the images used, because then I'd have to take a screenshot, crop it in Paint, upload to image search service - definitely more effort than lifting a finger, which may be enough to bar some people from giving a try. Same goes for character portraits in mods.
Obviously, it's only true if you're cool about letting Chrome mine your private data for governments and ads agencies (still most popular browser though, or so I heard), but the idea of minimal effort required to track the source is something to give consideration to imo.
I jest.
: P
I made a picture combining all the portraits I override defaults with, akin to say http://enkida.deviantart.com/art/BG2-BioWare-NPCs-Portrait-Pack-v2-284165386. I use more Enkida portraits than any other artist, with Plasmocat a relative second and tied with defaults.
Now, what I've used in my own personal games, I haven't contacted the artists. I've modified some of the originals (5 if you want to count just cropping a wallpaper rather than actual image manipulation) and stick in my own games, haven't contacted the artists. Because of private personal use I figure I'm fine so far.
But, now I would like to post the picture combining them all, and now I seek permission from the original artists before I publicly post it. And I haven't gotten a reply from any of them in a week. I don't know how to even get in contact with Plasmocat, who has not logged for years into G3 where her portrait pack is hosted. I got a response and approval from the person for whom one of the modified portraits was made of her character, that's as close as I've gotten.
That said, it appears neither Plasmocat nor Enkida used to be particularly welcome about that, at least in the past. So there you go, I guess. For shame...