Welcome to Gaia! ::

Rikku2007's avatar

4,950 Points
  • Survivor 150
  • Treasure Hunter 100
  • Friendly 100
I wish I had much more time to make mine look more professional (certainly not my best work). If I would be chosen as a finalist, I would happily make mine the same quality as the rest. The ones that are being chosen are quite beautiful. congrats. You guys (finalists) have done truly beautiful work.
Manah Manson's avatar

Fashionable Hunter

11,100 Points
  • Battle Hardened 150
  • Signature Look 250
  • Hygienic 200
Quiris
Enlus
Quiris
Enlus
Quiris


Uh-oh, I just saw that too, but I don't know for sure...

Now that I look closer at it though, there are signs of inconsistency on the image,

The blue on it. It's not painted.
Take the image into your photoshop and use the burn tool on the purple section. You get the exact blue colour seen throughout the image.
Of course there's always the fact that they could just use burn as an artist, but then why would they go through the trouble of shading the purple? And why is the blue, especially on the mane, quite... stiff?
I don't see many painters use burn really, either.

. _ .

I really hope that it's not stolen, but I don't know...
My love of Unicorns is strong, so I certainly hope that it's not stolen. D:
... I... I use the dodge and burn tool too, hopefully not to a distasteful degree OTL

(and yes Nexodeus has some burn treatment as well XD)


Ah, really? xD
I've tried to use it, but I dislike the tones that come out of it. I think it's because I have more of a painter approach to things, rather than messing around with species tools and filters too much.
I've also grown to hate burn, since it can distort your colours a bit too much at times. : U
Oh, you only need to give it a delicate touch. And you need to use a very soft brush, that is the best way to use it. It's especially good for metallic surfaces, but yes you're right that sometimes it ruins the original colors. Sometimes burn works for me and other times I end up undo-ing it and painting everything manually. ^^


Hrmm, maybe I'll have to give them another chance, then. :3

For now, though, I really only use the luminosity filter layer to do "special effects" other than my initial colours and shading.

--

I hope that we can get a link to an original image for this unicorn soon. :T
Whether it's to clarify that it's stolen, or the artist clarifying that it is actually their work would be nice.
Ignoring my statement that burn isn't used too often-- I still find the parts that have been burned rather ruddy in spots.
The mane especially-- it looks like an original version may have intended for the mane to become very whispy and fade into the background like the back fur does, but the burn has made the splotched ends rather solid and strange looking.


As Much as I love the unicorn entry as Well, even my Boyfriend Was Saying it looks deathly Familiar; Supposedly They think it was taken from a Video Game and As Much as Hate to Say it, I'm noticing some similarities as Well and I'm Currently in the Process of Cross Refferenceing some things; I'll Let you guys know if I Find anything..I Really hope it's not taken though, it's colors are beautfiul even if there is something about it that seems...off... :/
I would agree that yes, the unicorn does seem eerily familiar, however, it could have also been a photo manipulation. At least, at first glance my gut feeling is that a photo of a horse was painted over and the tail, legs and mane were added in after the fact.

The pose seems incredibly awkward from the neck/chest area down. The tail certainly is not rendered to the quality of the unicorn's face and musculature above. Kinda like it was slapped in there, ya know?

And the back legs, that should be as muscular as it's forelegs, have no muscles whatsoever, which it is plain to see they tried to hide by drawing the tail over that area.

I'd like to think it is simply someone inexperienced with photoshop, or other graphic media. But, it is plain to see that not all of the image if of their own creation. It seems that maybe this entry is not a 'copypasta' but, rather parts of other images were borrowed and placed together and then painted over. Whether this should be allowed is up for debate, but I do think the artist should come clean as to where their references were from.
Finalists that have been announced so far are (in order of announcement):


User Image User Image

User Image User Image

User Image User Image

User Image


*note: I did re-size them to be the same size (300x300), as I do not want any of one to seem more important than the others.
Of course, the entries can also be seen at: http://www.facebook.com/playmonstergalaxy
Manah Manson's avatar

Fashionable Hunter

11,100 Points
  • Battle Hardened 150
  • Signature Look 250
  • Hygienic 200
Minichi01
I would agree that yes, the unicorn does seem eerily familiar, however, it could have also been a photo manipulation. At least, at first glance my gut feeling is that a photo of a horse was painted over and the tail, legs and mane were added in after the fact.

The pose seems incredibly awkward from the neck/chest area down. The tail certainly is not rendered to the quality of the unicorn's face and musculature above. Kinda like it was slapped in there, ya know?

And the back legs, that should be as muscular as it's forelegs, have no muscles whatsoever, which it is plain to see they tried to hide by drawing the tail over that area.

I'd like to think it is simply someone inexperienced with photoshop, or other graphic media. But, it is plain to see that not all of the image if of their own creation. It seems that maybe this entry is not a 'copypasta' but, rather parts of other images were borrowed and placed together and then painted over. Whether this should be allowed is up for debate, but I do think the artist should come clean as to where their references were from.


If they were using Parts of other Pictures that were not Originally theirs, it would be considered stolen art and therefore not a Valid entry. Though None of us are able to Confirm Copyright on this Unicorn 100% yet, I Do agree with you that the art is lacking and seems off in some areas; especially the Mane. You can even see some areas that make it Very blunt that the blending is inconsistent with some of the more better executed areas I Guess as I'd put it in my opinion. Like the Neck and the Back legs, some of the areas were Blended Quite beautifully indeed, but the Comparison to Some poorly blended areas over others makes me also think that art styles have been combined in this creation and thus makes it very sketchy and hard to believe this wasn't stolen work...
Manah Manson
Minichi01
I would agree that yes, the unicorn does seem eerily familiar, however, it could have also been a photo manipulation. At least, at first glance my gut feeling is that a photo of a horse was painted over and the tail, legs and mane were added in after the fact.

The pose seems incredibly awkward from the neck/chest area down. The tail certainly is not rendered to the quality of the unicorn's face and musculature above. Kinda like it was slapped in there, ya know?

And the back legs, that should be as muscular as it's forelegs, have no muscles whatsoever, which it is plain to see they tried to hide by drawing the tail over that area.

I'd like to think it is simply someone inexperienced with photoshop, or other graphic media. But, it is plain to see that not all of the image if of their own creation. It seems that maybe this entry is not a 'copypasta' but, rather parts of other images were borrowed and placed together and then painted over. Whether this should be allowed is up for debate, but I do think the artist should come clean as to where their references were from.


If they were using Parts of other Pictures that were not Originally theirs, it would be considered stolen art and therefore not a Valid entry. Though None of us are able to Confirm Copyright on this Unicorn 100% yet, I Do agree with you that the art is lacking and seems off in some areas; especially the Mane. You can even see some areas that make it Very blunt that the blending is inconsistent with some of the more better executed areas I Guess as I'd put it in my opinion. Like the Neck and the Back legs, some of the areas were Blended Quite beautifully indeed, but the Comparison to Some poorly blended areas over others makes me also think that art styles have been combined in this creation and thus makes it very sketchy and hard to believe this wasn't stolen work...


Ultimately, it will have to be something that the judges decide, altering images to some degree to 'make it your own' I consider acceptable. There are a lot of artists out there who use stock images (which are usually paid for) and therefore they alright to use in the creation of artwork. When you purchase a stock image you are buying the rights to 'use it as you will' and that includes alteration.

My suspicion however, is that this unicorn image was created using a search engine like 'google' to find images. Also, because things seem out of place, I suspect that the creator has used copyrighted material in the creation of their artwork instead of professional stock images.

Only when someone can find the original, unaltered image, will this debate be put to rest.
Jisen Meizuki's avatar

Invisible Hero

17,000 Points
  • Treasure Hunter 100
  • Invisibility 100
  • Peoplewatcher 100
Minichi01
Manah Manson
Minichi01
I would agree that yes, the unicorn does seem eerily familiar, however, it could have also been a photo manipulation. At least, at first glance my gut feeling is that a photo of a horse was painted over and the tail, legs and mane were added in after the fact.

The pose seems incredibly awkward from the neck/chest area down. The tail certainly is not rendered to the quality of the unicorn's face and musculature above. Kinda like it was slapped in there, ya know?

And the back legs, that should be as muscular as it's forelegs, have no muscles whatsoever, which it is plain to see they tried to hide by drawing the tail over that area.

I'd like to think it is simply someone inexperienced with photoshop, or other graphic media. But, it is plain to see that not all of the image if of their own creation. It seems that maybe this entry is not a 'copypasta' but, rather parts of other images were borrowed and placed together and then painted over. Whether this should be allowed is up for debate, but I do think the artist should come clean as to where their references were from.


If they were using Parts of other Pictures that were not Originally theirs, it would be considered stolen art and therefore not a Valid entry. Though None of us are able to Confirm Copyright on this Unicorn 100% yet, I Do agree with you that the art is lacking and seems off in some areas; especially the Mane. You can even see some areas that make it Very blunt that the blending is inconsistent with some of the more better executed areas I Guess as I'd put it in my opinion. Like the Neck and the Back legs, some of the areas were Blended Quite beautifully indeed, but the Comparison to Some poorly blended areas over others makes me also think that art styles have been combined in this creation and thus makes it very sketchy and hard to believe this wasn't stolen work...


Ultimately, it will have to be something that the judges decide, altering images to some degree to 'make it your own' I consider acceptable. There are a lot of artists out there who use stock images (which are usually paid for) and therefore they alright to use in the creation of artwork. When you purchase a stock image you are buying the rights to 'use it as you will' and that includes alteration.

My suspicion however, is that this unicorn image was created using a search engine like 'google' to find images. Also, because things seem out of place, I suspect that the creator has used copyrighted material in the creation of their artwork instead of professional stock images.

Only when someone can find the original, unaltered image, will this debate be put to rest.


I have to agree with everyone about the unicorn. It does look suspicious and it looks familiar too. However, we also have no proof of evidence yet to see if it is stolen or copyrighted. I did some investigation too (still haven't found it but I'm still looking) to see if it is stolen or not. I really hope that the artist will come out and explain the situation.
Congrats to the eight finalist who drew Moro (Which reminds me more of Zoro from Pokemon. .__.; )

As for Monoceros, I had searched the DA, Elfwood, and google (with different keywords) to see if the art is stolen or not. I've seen similar poses, but not as close as the drawing being submitted.
Quiris's avatar

Tipsy Shapeshifter

Minichi01
Manah Manson
Minichi01
I would agree that yes, the unicorn does seem eerily familiar, however, it could have also been a photo manipulation. At least, at first glance my gut feeling is that a photo of a horse was painted over and the tail, legs and mane were added in after the fact.

The pose seems incredibly awkward from the neck/chest area down. The tail certainly is not rendered to the quality of the unicorn's face and musculature above. Kinda like it was slapped in there, ya know?

And the back legs, that should be as muscular as it's forelegs, have no muscles whatsoever, which it is plain to see they tried to hide by drawing the tail over that area.

I'd like to think it is simply someone inexperienced with photoshop, or other graphic media. But, it is plain to see that not all of the image if of their own creation. It seems that maybe this entry is not a 'copypasta' but, rather parts of other images were borrowed and placed together and then painted over. Whether this should be allowed is up for debate, but I do think the artist should come clean as to where their references were from.


If they were using Parts of other Pictures that were not Originally theirs, it would be considered stolen art and therefore not a Valid entry. Though None of us are able to Confirm Copyright on this Unicorn 100% yet, I Do agree with you that the art is lacking and seems off in some areas; especially the Mane. You can even see some areas that make it Very blunt that the blending is inconsistent with some of the more better executed areas I Guess as I'd put it in my opinion. Like the Neck and the Back legs, some of the areas were Blended Quite beautifully indeed, but the Comparison to Some poorly blended areas over others makes me also think that art styles have been combined in this creation and thus makes it very sketchy and hard to believe this wasn't stolen work...


Ultimately, it will have to be something that the judges decide, altering images to some degree to 'make it your own' I consider acceptable. There are a lot of artists out there who use stock images (which are usually paid for) and therefore they alright to use in the creation of artwork. When you purchase a stock image you are buying the rights to 'use it as you will' and that includes alteration.

My suspicion however, is that this unicorn image was created using a search engine like 'google' to find images. Also, because things seem out of place, I suspect that the creator has used copyrighted material in the creation of their artwork instead of professional stock images.

Only when someone can find the original, unaltered image, will this debate be put to rest.


If it is a bunch of images thrown together, I'd have to say that that probably is not allowed, or shouldn't be.
Even if they are stock images, a lot of people that do make stock images make specific rules about their work. One very common rule is that no one is to profit from their work.
Though it is not real money, if the unicorn places, the artist will be receiving a form of payment for the work.
Besides that, if it is from stock, then the original artists must be credited where the image is used. Meaning, the Monster Galaxy staff would have to list someone all of the pieces to give full credit to them.
And that's even just assuming that they are all stock.

I do fear more that it is just a bluntly stolen piece, though. The parts that have been burned still make me very suspicious.
Quiris
If it is a bunch of images thrown together, I'd have to say that that probably is not allowed, or shouldn't be.
Even if they are stock images, a lot of people that do make stock images make specific rules about their work. One very common rule is that no one is to profit from their work.
Though it is not real money, if the unicorn places, the artist will be receiving a form of payment for the work.
Besides that, if it is from stock, then the original artists must be credited where the image is used. Meaning, the Monster Galaxy staff would have to list someone all of the pieces to give full credit to them.
And that's even just assuming that they are all stock.

I do fear more that it is just a bluntly stolen piece, though. The parts that have been burned still make me very suspicious.


Does using other drawings as reference for modeling or poses but still draw it from scratch count as stolen? Because I kinda use some of the drawings as reference but made my entry from scratch. .__.; I had the idea of what pose I want my Moga to be, but I checked on other drawings for accuracy, model, and the position of the body pose.

EDIT: Almost forgot. Did anyone contact the MG staff about whether Monoceros is a stolen art or not? I think they need to know about this before the voting round begins.
Quiris's avatar

Tipsy Shapeshifter

Raiten Ka
Quiris
If it is a bunch of images thrown together, I'd have to say that that probably is not allowed, or shouldn't be.
Even if they are stock images, a lot of people that do make stock images make specific rules about their work. One very common rule is that no one is to profit from their work.
Though it is not real money, if the unicorn places, the artist will be receiving a form of payment for the work.
Besides that, if it is from stock, then the original artists must be credited where the image is used. Meaning, the Monster Galaxy staff would have to list someone all of the pieces to give full credit to them.
And that's even just assuming that they are all stock.

I do fear more that it is just a bluntly stolen piece, though. The parts that have been burned still make me very suspicious.


Does using other drawings as reference for modeling or poses but still draw it from scratch count as stolen? Because I kinda use some of the drawings as reference but made my entry from scratch. .__.; I had the idea of what pose I want my Moga to be, but I checked on other drawings for accuracy, model, and the position of the body pose.


Referencing is perfectly fine. :3
Referencing is only bad if you straight EYEBALL something copyrighted, making yours the exact same.
I use references all the time, but I usually make sure that I flip my drawing/ make definite changes/ and don't copy it too close to the original. You are allowed to eyeball stock references, though, and usually be perfectly alright with those since the final work is still done in your own hand.

For Suillus, the references that I used were:

http://www.humanevents.com/images/Wild_boar.jpg
I actually originally drew him facing to the left like the reference, but I made sure to change up the position of the legs quite a bit, and played with the head shape.

And for the vulture aspects I used,

http://www.vulture-territory.com/02260195.jpg
For the wings tucked and pattern reference.

http://www.south-africa-tours-and-travel.com/images/bearded-vulture-close-up-goldengatehighlandsnationalpark.jpg
For colouring the mask.

http://www.alparc.org/var/alparc/storage/images/media2/images/actualites/newsletter-27/gypaete-barbu/208743-1-fre-FR/gypaete-barbu.jpg
And this for ideas on the tail.

Many references used in all, but as long as things are definitely changed up, you're always good to go. :3
Referencing is pretty essential in art, especially for anatomical improvement, so it can't really be avoided.
Rikku2007's avatar

4,950 Points
  • Survivor 150
  • Treasure Hunter 100
  • Friendly 100
Raiten Ka
Congrats to the eight finalist who drew Moro (Which reminds me more of Zoro from Pokemon. .__.; )

As for Monoceros, I had searched the DA, Elfwood, and google (with different keywords) to see if the art is stolen or not. I've seen similar poses, but not as close as the drawing being submitted.


I forgot the name of it but their is a website that you upload a suspected stolen image and it auto-searches like colors, poses, etc, on the web. Teaches often use this. I caught some people stealing art before (including mine). I truly hate that. dishonesty is disgusting.
Quiris's avatar

Tipsy Shapeshifter

Rikku2007
Raiten Ka
Congrats to the eight finalist who drew Moro (Which reminds me more of Zoro from Pokemon. .__.; )

As for Monoceros, I had searched the DA, Elfwood, and google (with different keywords) to see if the art is stolen or not. I've seen similar poses, but not as close as the drawing being submitted.


I forgot the name of it but their is a website that you upload a suspected stolen image and it auto-searches like colors, poses, etc, on the web. Teaches often use this.


Tineye?

I have already tried using Tineye, with no results.
I know from experience, though, that Tineye will not always help you. When I was a moderator on an art site, it would only register results for half of the things I searched, even when I knew for a solid fact that the other half was stolen as well.
RIKUG0's avatar

Dapper Fatcat

oh man so uh a bunch of people pointed out the description i sent in to go along with my entry (meryog) is invalid
i realized i mistook 100 characters for 100 words! is there anything i can do to fix this?

um... also i guess if anyone would like to vote for my entry that'd be really awesome and thanks to all the people who voted for mine already !
Quiris's avatar

Tipsy Shapeshifter

RIKUG0
oh man so uh a bunch of people pointed out the description i sent in to go along with my entry (meryog) is invalid
i realized i mistook 100 characters for 100 words! is there anything i can do to fix this?

um... also i guess if anyone would like to vote for my entry that'd be really awesome and thanks to all the people who voted for mine already !


A moderator has already stated that the description was an optional point of the contest, and therefor the longer character count doesn't matter too much. :3

Beautiful work, btw! Good luck! C:

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games