Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Tutorial: How you make Promo Artwork for Spaceship

BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
edited June 2016 in Star Citizen
Hello,

I am artist and I will show how to make great promo artwork for spaceship in star citizen. Remember that i do not say stealing artwork is good! You should not do this. This is for education only!

This time i show how Drake Promotion was done with stolen stock photo (This is real: Star Citizen company did this you can check for yourself)

1. You steal stock photo from internet stock site.



2. You remove watermark and ring from right hand so no one notice is stolen, change dress a little, make shadow on floor. Nice! No one will see!



3. You make nice looking new face but Boss wife is getting angry so you photoshop Boss wife face into it.



4. You still get fired when people find out artwork is stolen and you did bad job at hiding watermark, shoes and removed ring on hand.



5. No profit


Please do not steal artwork from other people, i am artist and it is not nice to do this. If you are company with $115 million you do not steal artwork because that is just really bad!

I hope you like my tutorial. Please write me fedback!


This was tweet thing from Boss wife on Facebook!

https://www.facebook.com/215475438505750/photos/a.429027047150587.107566.215475438505750/1049223538464265/?type=3&theater

Post edited by Bascola on
«1345

Comments

  • TheYear1500TheYear1500 Member UncommonPosts: 531
    lol
  • Xeno.phonXeno.phon Member UncommonPosts: 350
    So what makes you think they didnt pay for that stock image (not art, stock image).
  • TheYear1500TheYear1500 Member UncommonPosts: 531
    Xeno.phon said:
    So what makes you think they didnt pay for that stock image (not art, stock image).
    Because when you purchase the rights, you are sent an image with out the watermark.  The watermark is there specifically to stop this very thing from happening.    
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 779
    edited June 2016
    Xeno.phon said:
    So what makes you think they didnt pay for that stock image (not art, stock image).
    Because you can see fragments of the watermark that they tried to get rid of, looks like an amateur at work, they look likes scars.
    on top of that, blurry outlines, and the neck of the sandy thing is deep in the uncanny valley

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Xeno.phon said:
    So what makes you think they didnt pay for that stock image (not art, stock image).
    sorry for my english, i am from spain. you can see the line from watermark in gif animation i made. this was not purchase!
  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Xeno.phon said:
    So what makes you think they didnt pay for that stock image (not art, stock image).
    Because you can see fragments of the watermark that they tried to get rid of, looks like an amateur at work, they look likes scars.
    on top of that, blurry outlines, and the neck of the sandy thing is deep in the uncanny valley
    Yes, very bad job, she look like tortuga :)
  • dsmartdsmart Member UncommonPosts: 386
    My sides.

    Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living.
    If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
    ...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them.

  • LorgarnLorgarn Member UncommonPosts: 417
    This is just bad work and practice in general. Obviously one of their artists needs a bit of a spank on his/her hands.
  • Turrican187Turrican187 Member UncommonPosts: 779
    Lorgarn said:
    This is just bad work and practice in general. Obviously one of their artists needs a bit of a spank on his/her hands.
    I just don't understand it, they cannot create an advertisement of a Spaceship that get's them 100.000s of $$$ and the "artist" that is responsible for the main image is saving 70c cause he rather spends worktime to get rid of a watermark > stealing from the original artist.
    And because he did it for a company it falls back to the company

    When you have cake, it is not the cake that creates the most magnificent of experiences, but it is the emotions attached to it.
    The cake is a lie.

  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Lorgarn said:
    This is just bad work and practice in general. Obviously one of their artists needs a bit of a spank on his/her hands.
    I just don't understand it, they cannot create an advertisement of a Spaceship that get's them 100.000s of $$$ and the "artist" that is responsible for the main image is saving 70c cause he rather spends worktime to get rid of a watermark > stealing from the original artist.
    And because he did it for a company it falls back to the company
    Art director should have checked this and make sure people have stock art when they ask. This is not bad artist, it is very bad Art Director and management. If this happen in my company Art director will be fired not artist.
  • DeathengerDeathenger Member UncommonPosts: 880
    LOL.... isn't the first time.
     
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    I'm confused right now.  Are you saying CIG did this?   Is your example something they actually did or is this a theory of yours?
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    OMG this is big news here.  If CIG has used this artwork without permission.  Really they can't afford to pay someone 50$ for a picture?  
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    edited June 2016
    filmoret said:
    I'm confused right now.  Are you saying CIG did this?   Is your example something they actually did or is this a theory of yours?
    I am sorry for confusing you. This is photo Boss wife Sandi post on facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/215475438505750/photos/a.429027047150587.107566.215475438505750/1049223538464265/?type=3&theater

    I look at concept art because i am artist and like to learn from other artist. CIG has very good artists! (not this one)

    So when i look at it i find something seem not right with neck and right hand is smudge from bad photoshop. I think this is shitty artist and then i remember stock art photo because we use 123rf a lot at work.

    So i look up stock art and find they stole it and used for promotion.

    You can check yourself with zoom from facebook picture.


  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Bascola said:
    filmoret said:
    I'm confused right now.  Are you saying CIG did this?   Is your example something they actually did or is this a theory of yours?
    I am sorry for confusing you. This is photo Boss wife Sandi post on facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/215475438505750/photos/a.429027047150587.107566.215475438505750/1049223538464265/?type=3&theater

    I look at concept art because i am artist and like to learn from other artist. CIG has very good artists! (not this one)

    So when i look at it i find something seem not right with neck and right hand is smudge from bad photoshop. I think this is shitty artist and then i remember stock art photo because we use 123rf a lot at work.

    So i look up stock art and find they stole it and used for promotion.

    You can check yourself with zoom from facebook picture.


    Is it possible they paid for but didn't want to wait and just used the sample?
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    filmoret said:
    Bascola said:
    filmoret said:
    I'm confused right now.  Are you saying CIG did this?   Is your example something they actually did or is this a theory of yours?
    I am sorry for confusing you. This is photo Boss wife Sandi post on facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/215475438505750/photos/a.429027047150587.107566.215475438505750/1049223538464265/?type=3&theater

    I look at concept art because i am artist and like to learn from other artist. CIG has very good artists! (not this one)

    So when i look at it i find something seem not right with neck and right hand is smudge from bad photoshop. I think this is shitty artist and then i remember stock art photo because we use 123rf a lot at work.

    So i look up stock art and find they stole it and used for promotion.

    You can check yourself with zoom from facebook picture.


    Is it possible they paid for but didn't want to wait and just used the sample?
    I work with 123rf and if you pay you get artwork instantly. No waiting. Pay - download - bueno!

    You never use watermark copyright pictures for promotion, marketing or any thing that public sees. NEVER. Is learned first thing in art school.

    All artist use copyright material for concept internal review. That is normal. But you keep this secret ;)


  • DeivosDeivos Member EpicPosts: 3,692
    Stolen art = bad, but let's make a few distinctions.

    For one, yes, CIG is held responsible for the fact that one of their artists did something like that, but it is a matter of internal punitive action against the artist who make the piece.

    On the legal end all this means is they pull/edit the image, or just pay whatever the cost is for the stock image.

    They can make a public apology if they want, but it's really not necessary in the least. Any punitive action taken against the artist, be it mild or severe, is also not necessary for them to report on.

    So to be clear,

    • Stealing stock/art = bad
    • Person/people responsible = company
    • Punishment necessary = none
    If we're gonna call this any sort of problem, it's an internal affair for them to deal with as they see fit. Personally I'd just do a check into the rest of the artist's work to look for other discrepancies and so long as nothing else pops up all that'd happen is a warning. If they are a repeat offender then actual punishment would come.

    This may be something people can be unhappy about, but it's also something that no one but CIG and the owners of the stock image has any reason to fret over.

    Plus there's some rather annoying quibbles to be made about the laws around the use and alteration of art online. "Fair Use" can be fudged in many cases to justify things, and the fallback would be the claim that's it's been heavily edited and repurposed. However, it being an art piece for a for-profit company makes it fall somewhat outside the actual legal bounds of fair use.

    As I already explained though. that's all a problem for CIG to deal with internally with the owners of the stock art.

    Not saying it's good or bad (personally I'd say it's bad), but I am saying it's not something people should lose their cheese over unless they really enjoy headbutting a wall.

    "The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay

    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin

  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Deivos said:
    • Stealing stock/art = bad
    • Person/people responsible = company
    • Punishment necessary = none

    So you say: No punishment for company if it steals art from artists but is ok that companies punish people when they steal their art? I will bet you money if i steal art from star citizen company and sell it they will come and punish me. If i go make t-shirt with their logo and spaceship they will punish me.

    your world is wrong! I have no word in english to say how wrong it is what you say.
  • adamlotus75adamlotus75 Member UncommonPosts: 387
    This crap is the norm for SC.
  • DeivosDeivos Member EpicPosts: 3,692
    edited June 2016
    Bascola said:
    Deivos said:
    • Stealing stock/art = bad
    • Person/people responsible = company
    • Punishment necessary = none

    So you say: No punishment for company if it steals art from artists but is ok that companies punish people when they steal their art? I will bet you money if i steal art from star citizen company and sell it they will come and punish me. If i go make t-shirt with their logo and spaceship they will punish me.

    your world is wrong! I have no word in english to say how wrong it is what you say.
    And in that case you are placed in the role of the company.

    Why I said "punishment necessary = none" is because there is legally and functionally nothing that can be done by anyone save for CIG itself and the owners of the stock art (as I already stated).

    Your argument just falls in-line with my already made statement. Hence the paragraph right after that part you just quoted from me.

    Though you did highlight a different problem that exists for us when it comes to copyrights in the US. It actually is rather hard for us as individuals to protect art or other copyrights (but especially art). Stealing content and editing it or even just using it and labeling it as a "parody" or otherwise is generally enough to legally justify the circumvention of license laws on art.

    And honestly....it bothers me a lot.

    My point on this however was that yes, CIG is responsible for what happened. However, there is nothing that getting up in arms about this does. The "punishment" that can be legally enacted is at worst a lawsuit that the art holder can only expect to gain whatever would be reasonable to claim as lost profit (which with the way licensing the images works, only amounts to the cost of the image). Most of the "punishment" then simply becomes an internal affair for CIG in dealing with the artist, which there is absolutely nothing anyone but CIG has say over.

    EDIT: I would care to clarify that this is not me defending CIG or damning them. More so I am trying to clarify the nature of the issue and that the 'consequences' are already effectively decided (and of negligible impact to CIG).

    Though, that might be a reason for some to complain right there...

    "The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay

    "The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin

  • KefoKefo Member EpicPosts: 3,907
    filmoret said:
    OMG this is big news here.  If CIG has used this artwork without permission.  Really they can't afford to pay someone 50$ for a picture?  
    Not the first time and probably not the last. A Kickstarter campaign for a board game was found to have used multiple stolen art assets. While its for something outside the company I believe the person who did the art is an employee of CIG. 
  • TalulaRoseTalulaRose Member RarePosts: 1,247
    I wonder how much of the kick-starter money the owner of the copyright can get.
  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    Deivos said:
    Bascola said:
    Deivos said:
    • Stealing stock/art = bad
    • Person/people responsible = company
    • Punishment necessary = none

    So you say: No punishment for company if it steals art from artists but is ok that companies punish people when they steal their art? I will bet you money if i steal art from star citizen company and sell it they will come and punish me. If i go make t-shirt with their logo and spaceship they will punish me.

    your world is wrong! I have no word in english to say how wrong it is what you say.

    My point on this however was that yes, CIG is responsible for what happened. However, there is nothing that getting up in arms about this does. The "punishment" that can be legally enacted is at worst a lawsuit that the art holder can only expect to gain whatever would be reasonable to claim as lost profit (which with the way licensing the images works, only amounts to the cost of the image). Most of the "punishment" then simply becomes an internal affair for CIG in dealing with the artist, which there is absolutely nothing anyone but CIG has say over.


    This is not some kid stealing apple from grocery store when mommy comes and pays for apple. I laugh when you say "only amounts to the cost of the image'

    You are wrong. I work in a Art Agency. If someone steals our art to sell product we sue for everything profit they make from our art plus damages. If they sold products for 100,000 euro we get all of it and we get damages for all possible sale they could make in 1-3 year. Judge may vary on years but minimum 1 year. So if they sold 100,000 euro in 1 month we get 1,200,000 - 3,600,000 total.

    This is reality in business work not some child fantasy. Sorry i mean no disrespect to you but you are very wrong!

  • filmoretfilmoret Member EpicPosts: 4,906
    Bascola said:
    filmoret said:
    Bascola said:
    filmoret said:
    I'm confused right now.  Are you saying CIG did this?   Is your example something they actually did or is this a theory of yours?
    I am sorry for confusing you. This is photo Boss wife Sandi post on facebook.

    https://www.facebook.com/215475438505750/photos/a.429027047150587.107566.215475438505750/1049223538464265/?type=3&theater

    I look at concept art because i am artist and like to learn from other artist. CIG has very good artists! (not this one)

    So when i look at it i find something seem not right with neck and right hand is smudge from bad photoshop. I think this is shitty artist and then i remember stock art photo because we use 123rf a lot at work.

    So i look up stock art and find they stole it and used for promotion.

    You can check yourself with zoom from facebook picture.


    Is it possible they paid for but didn't want to wait and just used the sample?
    I work with 123rf and if you pay you get artwork instantly. No waiting. Pay - download - bueno!

    You never use watermark copyright pictures for promotion, marketing or any thing that public sees. NEVER. Is learned first thing in art school.

    All artist use copyright material for concept internal review. That is normal. But you keep this secret ;)


    Since this was her private facebook account.  We could assume it was meant for inside eyes only.  But since I'm sure Sandy doesn't know every detail of how business operates she posted a photo that probably wasn't suppose to be made public.  Now if CIG is using these photos on their website as advertising then yes we have a major problem.  I can easily see her making that kind of mistake without even realizing it.
    Are you onto something or just on something?
  • BascolaBascola Member UncommonPosts: 425
    edited June 2016
    filmoret said:
    Bascola said:
    I work with 123rf and if you pay you get artwork instantly. No waiting. Pay - download - bueno!

    You never use watermark copyright pictures for promotion, marketing or any thing that public sees. NEVER. Is learned first thing in art school.

    All artist use copyright material for concept internal review. That is normal. But you keep this secret ;)


    Since this was her private facebook account.  We could assume it was meant for inside eyes only.  But since I'm sure Sandy doesn't know every detail of how business operates she posted a photo that probably wasn't suppose to be made public.  Now if CIG is using these photos on their website as advertising then yes we have a major problem.  I can easily see her making that kind of mistake without even realizing it.
    Facebook is not for inside eyes only, Facebook is not private, i must laugh at this! No, she is not private if she post product information from work on public website. The picture i also saw on the website of star citizen.

    I look and she is head of marketing, right? So you say that head of marketing "doesn't know every detail of how business operates"? Wow, this makes me scared! Why is she getting paid high management salary when she has no experience? Maybe because she is boss wife, i think!

    I don't know if i can believe what you say!



    So late now, i have to work. Guys at work will go crazy if i tell them. I go sleep now.
This discussion has been closed.