THE PACK Message Boards

ok i am sorry to the people who think i have copyrighted but i luv to draw and don't tell me again that plagiarism or something like that.

But i am sorry

i hope people will forgive me

Loving to draw is a perfectly admirable trait, claiming other people's artwork as your own isn't. Even if it's just a word or three, give some credit where it's due.
Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but it helps if you make a mention of who you're imitating,.

While I didn't give any advice when I locked the other thread; I locked it so that the debate would not continue. The only thing that I would suggest you do, that should prevent any misunderstandings in the future is this:

"Check out this new redraw I did (image) based on (original artwork or link)." It may not be as fun as saying 'hey, look at my new artwork!', but it'll prevent folks from thinking it's an art theft (which, the reaction you got was because some folks on the board, including myself, have run into true cases of art theft).

So, you're good in my book, at this point.

EDIT: I locked the other thread so that we wouldn't wind up with a drama fest about your artwork. I was about to PM you something saying exactly this, but this thread was already here. So there you have it.

Maybe you should post something that you actually drew in the art forum? People here are supportive of new artists and will offer constructive comments. As takyoji pointed out before the thread was locked, that picture was unfortunately not a re-draw.

All you have to do is say "Here's a master study I did on(whatever art), by (whatever artist)."

That's really all that it takes.

I remember my partner, Moonraiser, did a study once of another artist and I advised him on how to share it, simply by saying whom the original piece was by, that it was a study of that piece, and what was involved in his version of it.

I don't think any rational and reasonable person would react negatively to a study, you just hve to say that that is what it is. And you can't be judged harshly for making the mistake once either, anyone is capable of making a mistake. But now you know for future reference.

The thing is, you know what to do now should you ever post a study again, so there's no need for remorse.

In other words: Hakuna matata, or nullus anxietas, whichever you prefer!

Vagrant wrote:That's really all that it takes.

I remember my partner, Moonraiser, did a study once of another artist and I advised him on how to share it, simply by saying whom the original piece was by, that it was a study of that piece, and what was involved in his version of it.

I don't think any rational and reasonable person would react negatively to a study, you just hve to say that that is what it is. And you can't be judged harshly for making the mistake once either, anyone is capable of making a mistake. But now you know for future reference.

The thing is, you know what to do now should you ever post a study again, so there's no need for remorse.

In other words: Hakuna matata, or nullus anxietas, whichever you prefer!

Vagrant is giving good advice here.

However, I think a clarification here is important. I think the people in this thread are under the impression that Wolf Gal posted a trace-over, an imitation, or a study... this is not the case. She posted a pixel-for-pixel copy of a work, which takyoji proved beyond a shadow of a doubt.

You can do that too, but you might want to word it differently. It would be best to start such a thread like, "cool werewolf picture I found," and then make sure to say where you found it, and who the artist was in the thread. That way there's no confusion.

I agree with everyone on here, and I'm sorry for any drama that I may have caused on that thread.