[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/jp/ - Otaku Culture

View post   
  [?]In ghost mode, only threads with non-archived posts will be shown
File: 279 KB, 1396x1000, yumino-plagiarism-001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844667 No.5844667 [Reply] [Original]

http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2010/08/01/yunomi-ultimate-plagiarist/

Good job destroying an artist's career, Internet dickheads.

>> No.5844673

It was 2ch that did,fuck face.

>> No.5844679

>sankaku

>> No.5844685

get out sankaku devs

>> No.5844688

I don't see the big deal about using magazine spreads as the base for your art. Also, couldn't you say she destroyed her own career by plagarizing other works?

>> No.5844757
File: 133 KB, 807x738, Reimu__s_Final_Moments_by_mugenjohncel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844757

Hmm... I dunno... I don't see any problem with this... as long as you used something as reference... tracing on the other hand is a bit tricky... I know there is a really good naked image of Sakuya image that is traced from a real photo since the knee part would be very difficult to draw... well, he did admit it... I to use reference from the internet especially when in a hurry... Look at this for example... I sketched this Touhou pose while looking at a picture of a baby crawling I yahoo searched, without the reference... it would have taken me longer to sketch...

OK, some of her works are quite blatant traces... but still not reason enough to flame her...

>> No.5844766

>sankaku

>> No.5844769

>>5844757
OK I take back a few of my words... after looking at the evidence... they really are plagiarism of the highest level...

>> No.5844781

>>5844769
>>5844757
STOP WITH THE FUCKING ELLIPSES

>> No.5844782

>Call out hacks
>HOW FUCKING DARE YOU EXPOSE SOMEONE AS A FRAUD YOU SUCK OOGAA OOGAA OOGAA
Good. The less credibility hack-artists have the better.

Also

>sankakucomplex

>> No.5844787

>>5844781
I'm trying OK. It's just not easy.

>> No.5844793

Some are very much plagiarizing most of it though, no. Saying that turning a photo of someone into anime that's like saying you can't go outside and paint a landscape and say it's your painting. But the sketchy thing is that lots of her art doesn't look the same style. Plus, tons of people even use other anime pictures as a reference, but they change it. That would be to me the only plagiaristic thing done here, that's stealing artwork, and to me photos are never going to be artwork.

>> No.5844798

i was ready to say something along the lines of "these stances and poses aren't copyrighted or anything, she can trace them alright", seeing the "coming from a commercial sample library – with rights to each image costing in the region of $100." part makes me think she's an idiot for messing with idiots who claim rights on expressions on faces and pictures of bunnies.

Still, believing that drawing two people on a bike is plagiarism because there's another picture of two people on a bike somewhere on the net is at least laughable.

>> No.5844805

>>5844781
Do you...Anonymous, might you...have, a problem...

...with ellipses?

>> No.5844806

>shitkaku lolitacomplex

>> No.5844813
File: 34 KB, 500x375, japanese bird.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844813

Hmm... just for fun... I'll do a quick plagiarism myself using this image... will be back...

>> No.5844820
File: 3 KB, 300x57, ellipses.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844820

>>5844805

>> No.5844823
File: 19 KB, 286x400, marcel-duchamp-mona-lisa-with-a-moustache-6000.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844823

http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2010/08/01/marcel-duchamp-ultimate-plagiarist/

LOOK AT THIS PLAGIARIST GUIZ, HE TRACED MONA LISA AND PUT A MOUSTACHE ON HER!!! CAN YOU BELIEVE THE LEVEL OF PLAGIARISM??

>> No.5844828

>>5844813

Can't someone just make Mugen a greasemonkey script that autocorrects all his ellipses?

It would be a benefit to us all.

>> No.5844830

Everyone fucking does that.

Also go back to sankaku! You are not welcome here!

>> No.5844832

>sankakucomplex.com

Holy shit fuck off.

Yes, I'm mad you /a/ piece of shit.

>> No.5844834

>sankakucomplex

Welcome to /jp/, I see it's your first time posting here. We have some "unoffical rules" if you will, and you just broke a big one! It's okay though, just try not to post until you've been here for more than a few hours, okay?

>> No.5844837

>>5844828
Actually, there's an even better script that's available. It lets you filter his posts completely! It increases /jp/'s overall post quality by 50%, guaranteed

>> No.5844845
File: 2 KB, 300x57, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844845

>sankaku
spotted one

>> No.5844847
File: 53 KB, 600x450, 6a00d41430187d685e00e398ec4a8e0005-500pi.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844847

>>5844834

>> No.5844851
File: 125 KB, 1211x765, yumino-plagiarism-038.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844851

>>5844798
Except the bike is traced down and colored to the exact detail. For Christ sake, the shithead even kept the sticker.

This picture here was my particular favorite. It's zoomed and had a few touches with the blur tool and the brightness setting is a little tweaked. However, it's still using a copyright photo without permission. This isn't even traced.

>> No.5844852
File: 82 KB, 500x375, australian shark boiling tea.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844852

>>5844813
There...

>> No.5844867
File: 112 KB, 800x715, yumino-plagiarism-029.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844867

This one is my favorite.

"She traced this image!"
"No, wait, it was this one she traced!"

Every fucking image on the entire internet can have this done to it. Prove me wrong.

>> No.5844875

>>5844851
>Copyright photo

There's your problem. Believe me, it is a problem.

>>5844852
What did we say about ellipses, mugen? Come on, I know you can try harder than that.

>> No.5844886

Her art was crap anyway. I suppose anything traced from 3D would be though.

>> No.5844892

>>5844851
Also, I will refer you to this picture.>>5844823
This should teach you (and that kindergarten shitkaku for that matter) some things about art.

>> No.5844898

>copyrighted photo

HURRRRRRRP DURUUUURRPPPPP

>> No.5844894
File: 34 KB, 394x682, New Canvas.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844894

>>5844867

Easy way to find out.
The bottom one is plausible as the faces match up to a certain extent, but the top just looks like a baseless accusation.

I'd have to agree on things like the sunset one, though.

>> No.5844900

Doesn't it look more like they were purposely finding images that matched his/her drawings?
I'm pretty sure most if not all 2d has some 3d counterpart.

>> No.5844910

What some of you are missing is the point of calling plagiarism a crime.

Copying someone else isn't necessarily bad; with Marcel Duchamp ebove, everyone obviously knows it's the Mona Lisa, and Duchamp wouldn't deny it.

The problem arises when you copy something else and then try and pass if off as your own work.

>> No.5844911

>>5844900
See >>5844851
It's a perfect match but cropped to fit the scope of the drawing.

Also the rabbit shirt was pathetic, along with the bike that was detailed EXACTLY like the one in the picture. Some of them are a little hard to buy while others are dead on.

>> No.5844920
File: 15 KB, 253x199, images..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844920

Whats the huge deal? 10's of american artists do this for official work all the time.

>> No.5844924
File: 35 KB, 318x480, Warhol-Campbell_Soup-1-screenprint-1968.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844924

>>5844911
Yeah, you're right, and you know what else I have to say?
Campbell should have sued that motherfucker Warhol for stealing the tomato soup can image. I mean, look at it, it's dead on.

You're an idiot.

>> No.5844927

>>5844910
She did exactly that. Seeing as how she's a commissioned artist, this means she traced and copied scenery that she doesn't own the rights to and then charged people for it.

She'll probably try to save face by saying she never took credit for backgrounds and traces, but we all know that's bullshit.

>> No.5844932

>>5844924

Read the thread, retard.
See:
>>5844910

>> No.5844940

>>5844927

Just for the record, I wasn't saying she didn't.

I was rebutting the people saying 'Andy Warhol is a plagiarist' etc etc.

>> No.5844946

>>5844924
>Implying Andy Warhol traced 32 big-ass cans of soup
HURRDURR

>> No.5844954
File: 13 KB, 553x349, facepalm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5844954

>>5844910
>>5844927
And what you are missing is that the only one who could claim rights to a picture of A FUCKING RABBIT, I REPEAT, A FUCKING R-A-B-B-I-T is either the rabbit itself or its Maker.

Jesus Christ, is this some sort of elaborate troll for art fans? Because, you know what? It's really fucking working, I'm frustrated out of my ass at how some people can have skulls as thick as to claim rights on pictures of rabbits.

She doesn't even use the exact images, you fucking idiots.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRAibyGpiYA

>> No.5844977

>>5844954

If she took the picture herself, it's more acceptable.
I won't deny that she does have skill.

But there is a legal problem if someone or some company that isn't the artist has copyright over the photo, and the artist used it without acknowledgement.

>> No.5844982

So apparently using a photographic reference is now plagiarising, oh 2ch you so silly. Some of those are legitimate though - the last one being the most painful example

>> No.5844993

>>5844977
Uh oh... you mean like what I did earlier?...

>>5844813
>>5844852

>> No.5845006

>>5844954
Wouldn't be anything to write home about if the whiskers weren't spot on in their position and how they curved.

>> No.5845007

>>5844946
Way to miss my point, eh? Ok, here's another example.

How many people have sketched, painted or taken photos of the same <insert name of random bridge here>? What should they do? Start claiming rights on the exact point of view, angle or whatever of the bridge?
They are images of people, I'm not even gonna go as far as to say you could put any person in the same pose and it would be the same. Still, it's fucking ART, she didn't say "hey guys, I took these photos, they are mine", she traced them and added effects. There's a huge difference.

>> No.5845022

>>5845006
Ok, now I know you're trolling, I hope you're proud of yourself. Not that I expected anything more intelligent from Tripfag McGee, but just saying.

>> No.5845713

You know who also used photo reference extensively?
Norman Rockwell.
http://www.pdnphotooftheday.com/2009/12/2778

>> No.5845719

>>5844823
Not pictured is "LHOOQ"

>> No.5845742

>>5844910

This..

>>5844852

That's not plagiarism. That seems to be more of a parody than anything else.

>> No.5845745

>>5844769
>mugenjohncel
Ever lrn2develop decent eroge?

>> No.5845794
File: 94 KB, 743x583, b0c183c9.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5845794

some are "meh, coincidence."

but others, and I really had respect for Yunomi.

>> No.5845798

>sankakucomplex

>> No.5845827

>sankaku
reported

>> No.5846003

Manga artists have been doing it for 50 years.

>> No.5846028

Does what was used to create an image make the value of the image itself less? Why? If it looks good it looks good, I don't care what the artist used to create it.

>> No.5846043

>sankaku
>mugen
QUALITY THREAD

>>
Reply to thread [?]Don't expect anything heroic. Your post will not be uploaded to the original board.
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Action