Pixelation

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Helm on August 13, 2007, 05:54:17 pm

Title: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 13, 2007, 05:54:17 pm
Recently Takam lashed out on the user Jericho (in this thread (http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?topic=4714.0)) for having made art that is as he says way too close to the art of Minish Cap. I agree with Takam that this is so. That situation played out as you can see if you read that thread. However a secondary matter annoyed me about that whole discussion, and it had to do with something I was shown a long time ago about Takam. He made this piece of artwork some time ago:

(http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/5660/okxs3.png)

the progress of which you can see in this thread. (http://www.wayofthepixel.net/pixelation/index.php?topic=1668.msg20534#msg20534) I remember at the time being very impressed by the mood and art direction in this piece, as from Takam to that point I had expected, to be honest, IP usage from other games he enjoyed like Street Fighter or Little Big Adventure and so on. So I felt this was a very nice step forward into original design.

(http://namco-ch.net/talesofthetempest/town/naliss/img/pic01.jpg)

Then I was forwarded this link (http://namco-ch.net/talesofthetempest/town/naliss/index.php) and I was really annoyed. However when that happened, that thread was played out and I didn't feel like dragging it back out so I could accuse Takam of whatever. It was gone, forget it. I just lost respect for Takam and decided not to give him any critique henceforth.

However the hypocrisy involved in how he adressed Jericho in this new thread, pretty much crucifying her for doing something less bad than what he did in his own thread (at least Jericho said that there was a big Minish Cap inspiration whereas Takam didn't say anywhere he was ripping off that concept art piece) was too infuriating to not make the facts known. I do not want Takam to be ridiculed or mocked, or anything. I want him to apologise to the userbase for lying and being a hypocrite and to Jericho specifically for waving his finger at her when the whole hand, let alone that finger was previously into the proverbial pie. Own up, clear the air, move on with a bit more humility. When this happens, this thread will be locked.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Feron on August 13, 2007, 10:39:23 pm
i find this thread appauling and am bemused as to why you would do something like this, this matter could quite easily been a private discussion between you and takam.

yeah he shouldnt have bitched so hard at jericho, but calling him out in public is quite shameful.

i am quite against threads that seemed to be aimed at a users actions, you did the same, RE: Kons website, and i dont feel it should be on the board for public discussion.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 13, 2007, 11:09:24 pm
I'm not sure what you think, I don't enjoy doing stuff like this. I have to do stuff I don't enjoy because of my position in this forum. Talking with Takam over PMs would solve nothing as I am not the one who is being taken advantage of (everyone who posted to help Takam on his thread is) nor am I the one who got the 'do as I say not as I do' lecture (Jericho). They are the ones I have to stick out for because I am a moderator in Pixelation. I know I'm not winning any points with anyone sitting on the fence over my attitude with measures such as these that seem vindictive, but so be it. I'm not here to make friends, I'm here to maintain the rules. If you don't mind that Takam effectively ripped that concept art piece off, fine. Others might, especially those that sat down and took Takam at face-value and gave him critique on the piece at the time. It's a bitch to want to help someone who has secretly lied to you by ommission.

And according to the rules, Takam has lied to the userbase, and then turned around and accused another person of doing exactly what he did himself. That's too much to take. Hence, this thread, and it'll be public like the wrongdoings were public. Find it appauling if you choose, but it's easy to rebel at a figure of authority and say how cruel they are. Easier than considering if they're doing something they don't necessarily like to because they have to.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Feron on August 13, 2007, 11:22:43 pm
Perhaps you could have posted that image in his OWN thread, perhaps asked him to publically apologise in his own thread via pms, perhaps a temporary ban.  Perhaps the pieces are coincidental (i doubt it) but nothing is impossible.

Find it appauling if you choose, but it's easy to rebel at a figure of authority and say how cruel they are. Easier than considering if they're doing something they don't necessarily like to because they have to.
i didnt say you're cruel, nor am i rebeling against your authority, nor am i saying you enjoy it.  im just saying there are alternative methods of dealing with things, and the "THIS PERONS WRONGDOINGS" thread is not a good one for the forums image.  this thread publically "attacks" takam (regardless of his actions to jericho) sets a bad example and is not one i think a lot of users want to see.

I do not want to keep bumping this, my point has been made.  If you want to continue discussing with me please feel free to hit me up on msn.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Zero on August 13, 2007, 11:24:51 pm
Because you're only posting this now, after Jericho's topic seems to me like you're doing this out of personal spite. You should have addressed the issue (minus the hippocracy point) at the time Takam did that piece. Being hippocratic is not against the rules. There's nothing wrong with him telling off Jericho about the similarities, although he was harsh; "do as I say not as I do." You're essentially using this thread to call Takam a hippocrat, which is not at all professional, despite the fact that you say you're doing this because you have to.

In my eyes, him telling Jericho off about the likeness in her piece would mean that he is done with any ripping he did, so all the more reason this should have been posted earlier, and all the more reason this could have been handled privately. Or, you could have bumped his thread with a warning when you were given the link.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 13, 2007, 11:54:16 pm
I didn't post then because the thread was dead and it was long after the fact and I decided to let it flow, and keep an eye out. As I have. Until now. Being a hypocrite is not against the rules, but posting art that is based on other art without mentioning the references is. Takam should apologise to the userbase and to Jericho in particular, this is what's up.

I am not professional, nor did I claim to be. I don't do my part to maintain Pixelation out of any professional desire, I am not getting paid nor do I play by that invented set of rules you have in your head about what 'pro behaviour' is. I was brought on board to maintain rules, and where I come from when people mess up they own up and carry on.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: sharprm on August 14, 2007, 12:16:34 am
Takam’s mistake? I thought I would be reading about Takam having an abortion.

Takam is not a hypocrite. There is a big difference between copying pixel art and making small changes versus basing pixel art off concept art. The later requires more skill. It is also what I imagine professional artists do when working in groups on projects.

Obviously it would be better if he posted references. However, he didn’t ask for critique on his buildings, only on the water. It therefore seems he was not directly taking credit for the mood of piece/design of building. A full apology seems unwarranted.

I propose that, given you have impeached Takam’s honour, this matter be settled with an old fashioned duel. Not duelling with pistols, but pixels. A competition to produce the best, most original pixel art of a coastal village in one week. If Helm wins, Takam apologises to the board, if Takam wins, Helm apologises to Takam.

Helm: Don’t run a similar smear campaign against me like you have Takam and Alex. Remember, I have those photos of you and the underage goat.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 14, 2007, 12:28:32 am
Takam’s mistake? I thought I would be reading about Takam having an abortion.

Takam is not a hypocrite. There is a big difference between copying pixel art and making small changes versus basing pixel art off concept art. The later requires more skill. It is also what I imagine professional artists do when working in groups on projects.

Absolutely. Takam's skill is priceless: taking concept art and making the game art you need out of it. He'll go far if he decides to work pro in the field or something. The issue is not ripping as a crutch to lack of skill like most rippers. It's ripping as a crutch to lack of imagination and instead of hiding this he should work on it. About it being against the rules, I quote:

Quote
Always clearly state what your references were in making a piece.

If he had said 'hey I found this concept art piece and I decided to make a tilemap out of it' that'd be fine, though there would be usual discussions over lack of imagination, etc as well there should be.

Quote
However, he didn’t ask for critique on his buildings, only on the water.

There's precident for this: Mirage posted an extensively edited Kof run animation and asked for critique only on the animation flow itself. Mirage is banned now.

Quote
If Helm wins, Takam apologises to the board, if Takam wins, Helm apologises to Takam.

I appreciate the attempt at levity and it's good to be reminded not to take the internet too seriously sometimes.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Dusty on August 14, 2007, 12:36:10 am
I guess Takam should be lucky considering most people are banned for similar things. Though, I guess it depends on how punishing he considers being publically called out.
Quote
Takam is not a hypocrite. There is a big difference between copying pixel art and making small changes versus basing pixel art off concept art. The later requires more skill. It is also what I imagine professional artists do when working in groups on projects.
In this case, it seems the same thing is done, but just using different mediums as reference. What does it matter that Jericho used Minish Cap as a reference? He still did the pixel work. Just because his reference was the pixel medium and can seem more similar than compared to a painting, doesn't mean there isn't just as much effort involved as there is using a painting as reference.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Zero on August 14, 2007, 01:41:54 am
I am not professional, nor did I claim to be. I don't do my part to maintain Pixelation out of any professional desire, I am not getting paid nor do I play by that invented set of rules you have in your head about what 'pro behaviour' is. I was brought on board to maintain rules, and where I come from when people mess up they own up and carry on.

Being a moderator, you have to act in a professional manner to set an example for other members. I did not mean professional as in payment, or anything relating to a job whatsoever, and I'm sure you knew that. I meant professional as in not starting a thread to yell at someone because you have no respect for them.

Quote from: sharprm
Obviously it would be better if he posted references. However, he didn’t ask for critique on his buildings, only on the water. It therefore seems he was not directly taking credit for the mood of piece/design of building. A full apology seems unwarranted.
I completely agree with that. Helm, you could have PM-ed Takam and discussed this issue before making this thread. Ever heard of benefit-of-the-doubt? Takam doesn't seem like the type to copy artwork, something I'm sure we can agree on.

And what about sharprm's duel idea? You've convieniently avoided that.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: am_pm on August 14, 2007, 01:52:27 am
Helm, I agree with what you say and mean no disrespect by this, but maybe if TakaM's original act of ripping was dealt with earlier, this latter form of ripping would not have happened and this current situation would have never been conceived.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 14, 2007, 01:57:44 am
Your idea of what the ideal behaviour for a moderator is and mine differ. Nothing to do with professionalism at all.

There is in my eyes - and I've been doing this for a long time - no doubt that Takam referenced that image. Down to the ornamental patterns around the brick contour of the walls. Benefit of doubt is one thing, actively disbelieving insurmountable evidence in order to give me a hard time, completely another. I don't think anyone taking this seriously cannot spot the lift.

Quote
Takam doesn't seem like the type to copy artwork, something I'm sure we can agree on.

If you'd look through his other art you'd see there's little to no original concept to be found. However Takam can go right ahead and use established IP until the end of time for all I care. What I want him is not to conviniently forget to mention his sources.

About the duel, there's nothing to settle as there's no debate. Takam ripped, I am calling him out to apologise for his behaviour. Wether he can outpixel me or not is irrelevant. The day I rip anything, I expect the same behaviour by anyone that can spot my theft.

Quote
but maybe if TakaM's original act of ripping was dealt with earlier, this latter form of ripping would not have happened and this current situation would have never been conceived.

It was a dead thread by that time, to drag it back on the point was at the time considered needlessly cruel, especially since it wasn't a straight rip but a concept art piece. However I decided to keep an eye out to see where Takam goes with his art. It was an act of kindness that I didn't drag that thread back up now and ban in one swoop, and it's an act of kindness now that I ask for a public apology and nothing more.

What is this 'latter form of ripping' you're talking about? Jericho's and Takam's case are not related. That we let Takam's old swipe slide at the time has nothing to do with Jericho's lifting of the MC tree. I do not follow.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: am_pm on August 14, 2007, 02:08:26 am
Not related? It's TakaM's hypocrisy on Jericho's piece that spawned this request for a public apology.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 14, 2007, 02:17:28 am
Not related? It's TakaM's hypocrisy on Jericho's piece that spawned this request for a public apology.

Ah, I see what you mean. If we're talking about efficiency, just banning when I was shown the reference would indeed be optimal as this situation right now would not have existed. However efficiency isn't the topmost priority, and such discussions though they might at this point seem unpleasant are not unwelcome. Regardless of where this leads for Takam (who I wonder if he'll even show) this thread is for the best of the userbase of Pixelation, myself, Jericho and ultimately himself as well. Owning up when your bullshit catches up with you is a very valuable life lesson and one that I don't mind in the least to facilitate, even if it's to the detriment of the lovey-dovey Pixelation mood. Furthermore being apologised to on the internet for bad bahaviour is especially rare an occurence and this is unjust. People think just because it's the internet, it's okay to be assholes and just sign off when they're done. This isn't how we play here.

The whole situation is momentarily unpleasant, but it's good karma, and sets good precedent. If it spells it loud and clear that rippers and manipulators are not welcome here, and that we don't have the ruleset just for show, I don't mind taking the 'helm is a meanie!' hit. It isn't the first time it won't be the last.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: .TakaM on August 14, 2007, 02:34:02 am
I was wondering when this would come back to bite me in the ass :yell:

I'll start with the thought process when I started those tiles.
Some of you might remember I started with some trees and cliffs, then some thatch roof cottages and terrain tiles.

Then I didn't touch my tiles for a long time
After a while of playing tales of the tempest, I found myself wanting to translate the tiles to 2D, and I made it so they'd fit in with the set I had already started.
I knew I wouldn't be able to use these for anything commercial, and I knew they were ultimately a waste of time.
When I started making the water tiles, I hit another wall, and made the topic with the tiles this topic is about.
I got lots of helpful advice on the water, and some extra advice for the buildings.. I didn't really want to say, nah don't worry about it, I've stolen the design and I'm not using the tiles anymore, and hopefully avoid a fiasco similar to this.

What did I learn in the process of ripping the design? just that it was an enormous waste of time.
I am truly sorry for leading you all to believe the tiles were of original design, my use for the tiles didn't really go much beyond framing the water tiles I wanted help with, but I know it's silly to justify it.

However, a hypocrite is not what I'd consider myself.
Since I got introduced into pixelart through fangame communities, abusing IP's and copyrighted content, I've learned that it is the slowest way to improve in this medium, I've learned there is no respect in it, and when I see someone following the same mindset I once followed, I want to steer them down a different path - avoiding my mistakes.




about this public calling out, I don't feel offended at all, rather relieved that I have been called out, and it wasn't made into a personal attack as it easily could've been

edit-
Takam: be patient for a while...
I was wondering what I'd be waiting for :P
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: am_pm on August 14, 2007, 02:41:17 am
Not related? It's TakaM's hypocrisy on Jericho's piece that spawned this request for a public apology.

Ah, I see what you mean. If we're talking about efficiency, just banning when I was shown the reference would indeed be optimal as this situation right now would not have existed. However efficiency isn't the topmost priority, and such discussions though they might at this point seem unpleasant are not unwelcome. Regardless of where this leads for Takam (who I wonder if he'll even show) this thread is for the best of the userbase of Pixelation, myself, Jericho and ultimately himself as well. Owning up when your bullshit catches up with you is a very valuable life lesson and one that I don't mind in the least to facilitate, even if it's to the detriment of the lovey-dovey Pixelation mood. Furthermore being apologised to on the internet for bad bahaviour is especially rare an occurence and this is unjust. People think just because it's the internet, it's okay to be assholes and just sign off when they're done. This isn't how we play here.

The whole situation is momentarily unpleasant, but it's good karma, and sets good precedent. If it spells it loud and clear that rippers and manipulators are not welcome here, and that we don't have the ruleset just for show, I don't mind taking the 'helm is a meanie!' hit. It isn't the first time it won't be the last.



I don't think your mean at all Helm, I'm just throwing in my $0.02
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Zero on August 14, 2007, 02:42:19 am
There is in my eyes - and I've been doing this for a long time - no doubt that Takam referenced that image. Down to the ornamental patterns around the brick contour of the walls. Benefit of doubt is one thing, actively disbelieving insurmountable evidence in order to give me a hard time, completely another. I don't think anyone taking this seriously cannot spot the lift.
No no, I understand that part, it's obviously based off that pic. What I meant was that you should have given him the benefit of the doubt, since it was possible he wasn't trying to claim the ideas in the image as his own, which as he just said, turned out to be the case.
Title: Re: Takam's mistake.
Post by: Helm on August 14, 2007, 02:44:51 am
Quote
I am truly sorry for leading you all to believe the tiles were of original design, my use for the tiles didn't really go much beyond framing the water tiles I wanted help with, but I know it's silly to justify it.

This'll do as far as I'm concerned. What we find detestable in others is often what we hate about ourselves.