Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
HOW MUCH EDITING UNTIL A SPRITE IS YOUR OWN?
Posts
Pages:
1
Kanto_Ruki
131
Kanto_Ruki
View playlists
CloseJust as a general question, I don't mean to cause any uproar of any kind about thievery, but I was wondering:
How much over editing is needed to make a sprite original?
Just using a sprite as a base of reference, can you keep small qualities of that sprite as long as you edit it so much that it would be hard to see if they are related?
If not, how can you make a sprite without infringing on someone else's work?
NOTE: I am a little tired as it is in the early morning so sorry if the question is not being asked properly.
UPDATE (3/24/2015-2:13AM)
Now the reason why am asking this question is because sprite creation seems to be similar to the Ship of Theseus Paradox (but altered). Logically if you make a sprite from scratch, no matter how infinite the number is, there is always a chance that you will create a sprite that someone else did or close to. So the question is if that number does occur, would the sprite that you made from scratch be considered plagiarism or your own? What/Where are the exact rules for when something is considered plagiarism or not?
I know this thought may not be completely relevant to the case, but it's something standing in my way of knowing how this originality works.
However here is another question: Does telling you that I used a sprite for a base or drawing inspiration from that sprite base impact on how you consider the sprite as a whole to be original or not?
Another thing, if drawing inspiration from something makes it not completely original, then nothing really would be original then, would it? If not, then what are the levels and fine lines of how original a specific thing can be? Is there a rating system to originality?
I maybe asking a lot of questions (even though its early in the morning again) but I want to know/see what the answers are to these questions.
Also, is there a system for telling how much a sprite is similar to another sprite? (The tiredness came back again... Odd questionings now...)
Just a last NOTE: I am perfectly fine with saying that I drew inspiration from the original sprite. I will try to contact the original creator for other related discussions.
UPDATE (3/24/2015-9:15PM)
►(This symbol will be used to highlight the paragraphs that are slightly important and may be referred to to be answered or to make an important read/clarification)
Sprite used for base (Top-Right) "Sprite #1":
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vk1cXQ9uKd8/S3WD_kSWO0I/AAAAAAAAAKQ/W1gjQmqnSds/s320/RPG_Maker_VX_Sprites_IMP__by_NWinmore.png
End result sprite "Sprite #2":
http://fav.me/d8mt6cn
►I should clarify a lil what I mean on using Sprite #1 as a base for Sprite #2. I'll also tell what I exactly did to get what I have. When I refer to Sprite #1 as a base, I mean using its outline except for a couple features (Eyes, pixel for a nose, ). So more of an outline, after I got the outline I edited the outline a bit (Widen legs and feet, compressed the torso, raised the height, made the ears pronounced as being further back). Then I edited the eyes a little, moved the eyes and nose around, then added color. The only color palette I kept was the white, black, and green. The brown was my color palette and I shaded it myself (I has shading skills :3). I have noticed aspects of Sprite #1 are not original since eyes and feet style are from other RTP sprites. The tail is the only thing left that I did not edit (besides the pupils, irises, pixel for nose, and ears shape ).
►Sprite #2 is NOT a fox! (Fox like maybe but still not a fox) Here're references of what Sprite #2 is suppose to be with a quick synopsis of what it is:
A gallery to see what they actually look like
http://tmc-on-devart.deviantart.com/gallery/34948925/Total-Meava
The best reference I have
http://fav.me/d3bt6nl
►Sprite #2 is a Meava (Me-va), they are a race that stand at about 2'0" (2'4.5" if including antennas ). The part that are perceived as the ears are actually the antennas, which are used to receive and send signals to their own kind. To an extension, the antennas are ears but not enough to be called ears as their ear canals are located at the base of the antennas. There is a variety of breeds depending mainly on their environment.
►When I was asking the comparison of Sprite #1 to Sprite #2 I was asking could you tell if I did not say anything, and you decided one day to be random and just compare sprites to one another, that the two sprites were related in any way. (Besides having a slight RTP feeling to them?)
►The Main Question/Thought for why topic exists:
Let's say you start with a basic sprite base. You then start editing the sprite heavily, until you are happy with what you created. Looking back at the original sprite you used to start with, it looks little to nothing like the sprite you resulted with, except for some small details that only you yourself can call out. The question becomes, was the sprite you made original, inspiration, or plagiarism to the sprite that you used?
{This is a slight alteration to "The Ship of Theseus" paradox}
I know originality is "from scratch" (and that inspiration is an influence on the piece) does the level of "inspiration" influence the originality of something? (Actually going to answer this myself since I see a recursion among the answers as "Yes") However hearing how something was made, especially the answers that have been given so far, influence its originality. Speaking vs Hushing seems to play a lot in if something can be evaluated as originality.
I could just as easily have lied and said "I made the sprite from scratch with influence from " or even just cut the source out and it may seem (in theory) no one would be the wiser. However, because of how honest I am I admit that I did not make the sprite completely from scratch, and now its "authenticity of originality" is in question. This brings me to the thought of Brain Games' episode "Paranormal" Game #5, where people suddenly have a change of thought when they are told something. Then when they were told the truth, their thoughts change.
►Last NOTE: I have had lil to no luck in finding a means of contacting the original maker of the artwork. Either I am dumb or this site is bananars, but could any of you try deciphering the site owner or maker starting with the site link here:
http://2120.cl/rpg-maker-vx-95b44-sprite-c6ae6
(as this is the only known link to the sprite that I have found)
PS: Sprite #1 is originally for RPG Maker VX as Sprite #2 is intended for RPG Maker VX Ace. Also that I am working with RPGM VXA if you are wondering.
How much over editing is needed to make a sprite original?
Just using a sprite as a base of reference, can you keep small qualities of that sprite as long as you edit it so much that it would be hard to see if they are related?
If not, how can you make a sprite without infringing on someone else's work?
NOTE: I am a little tired as it is in the early morning so sorry if the question is not being asked properly.
UPDATE (3/24/2015-2:13AM)
Now the reason why am asking this question is because sprite creation seems to be similar to the Ship of Theseus Paradox (but altered). Logically if you make a sprite from scratch, no matter how infinite the number is, there is always a chance that you will create a sprite that someone else did or close to. So the question is if that number does occur, would the sprite that you made from scratch be considered plagiarism or your own? What/Where are the exact rules for when something is considered plagiarism or not?
I know this thought may not be completely relevant to the case, but it's something standing in my way of knowing how this originality works.
However here is another question: Does telling you that I used a sprite for a base or drawing inspiration from that sprite base impact on how you consider the sprite as a whole to be original or not?
Another thing, if drawing inspiration from something makes it not completely original, then nothing really would be original then, would it? If not, then what are the levels and fine lines of how original a specific thing can be? Is there a rating system to originality?
I maybe asking a lot of questions (even though its early in the morning again) but I want to know/see what the answers are to these questions.
Also, is there a system for telling how much a sprite is similar to another sprite? (The tiredness came back again... Odd questionings now...)
Just a last NOTE: I am perfectly fine with saying that I drew inspiration from the original sprite. I will try to contact the original creator for other related discussions.
UPDATE (3/24/2015-9:15PM)
►(This symbol will be used to highlight the paragraphs that are slightly important and may be referred to to be answered or to make an important read/clarification)
Sprite used for base (Top-Right) "Sprite #1":
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vk1cXQ9uKd8/S3WD_kSWO0I/AAAAAAAAAKQ/W1gjQmqnSds/s320/RPG_Maker_VX_Sprites_IMP__by_NWinmore.png
End result sprite "Sprite #2":
http://fav.me/d8mt6cn
►I should clarify a lil what I mean on using Sprite #1 as a base for Sprite #2. I'll also tell what I exactly did to get what I have. When I refer to Sprite #1 as a base, I mean using its outline except for a couple features (Eyes, pixel for a nose, ). So more of an outline, after I got the outline I edited the outline a bit (Widen legs and feet, compressed the torso, raised the height, made the ears pronounced as being further back). Then I edited the eyes a little, moved the eyes and nose around, then added color. The only color palette I kept was the white, black, and green. The brown was my color palette and I shaded it myself (I has shading skills :3). I have noticed aspects of Sprite #1 are not original since eyes and feet style are from other RTP sprites. The tail is the only thing left that I did not edit (besides the pupils, irises, pixel for nose, and ears shape ).
►Sprite #2 is NOT a fox! (Fox like maybe but still not a fox) Here're references of what Sprite #2 is suppose to be with a quick synopsis of what it is:
A gallery to see what they actually look like
http://tmc-on-devart.deviantart.com/gallery/34948925/Total-Meava
The best reference I have
http://fav.me/d3bt6nl
►Sprite #2 is a Meava (Me-va), they are a race that stand at about 2'0" (2'4.5" if including antennas ). The part that are perceived as the ears are actually the antennas, which are used to receive and send signals to their own kind. To an extension, the antennas are ears but not enough to be called ears as their ear canals are located at the base of the antennas. There is a variety of breeds depending mainly on their environment.
►When I was asking the comparison of Sprite #1 to Sprite #2 I was asking could you tell if I did not say anything, and you decided one day to be random and just compare sprites to one another, that the two sprites were related in any way. (Besides having a slight RTP feeling to them?)
►The Main Question/Thought for why topic exists:
Let's say you start with a basic sprite base. You then start editing the sprite heavily, until you are happy with what you created. Looking back at the original sprite you used to start with, it looks little to nothing like the sprite you resulted with, except for some small details that only you yourself can call out. The question becomes, was the sprite you made original, inspiration, or plagiarism to the sprite that you used?
{This is a slight alteration to "The Ship of Theseus" paradox}
I know originality is "from scratch" (and that inspiration is an influence on the piece) does the level of "inspiration" influence the originality of something? (Actually going to answer this myself since I see a recursion among the answers as "Yes") However hearing how something was made, especially the answers that have been given so far, influence its originality. Speaking vs Hushing seems to play a lot in if something can be evaluated as originality.
I could just as easily have lied and said "I made the sprite from scratch with influence from " or even just cut the source out and it may seem (in theory) no one would be the wiser. However, because of how honest I am I admit that I did not make the sprite completely from scratch, and now its "authenticity of originality" is in question. This brings me to the thought of Brain Games' episode "Paranormal" Game #5, where people suddenly have a change of thought when they are told something. Then when they were told the truth, their thoughts change.
►Last NOTE: I have had lil to no luck in finding a means of contacting the original maker of the artwork. Either I am dumb or this site is bananars, but could any of you try deciphering the site owner or maker starting with the site link here:
http://2120.cl/rpg-maker-vx-95b44-sprite-c6ae6
(as this is the only known link to the sprite that I have found)
PS: Sprite #1 is originally for RPG Maker VX as Sprite #2 is intended for RPG Maker VX Ace. Also that I am working with RPGM VXA if you are wondering.
Avee
5794
In my book, an edit is always an edit. So it's always considered plagiarism.
But if you draw it from scratch, even though many parts look similar to someone else's sprite, then it's yours. As long as it doesn't look exactly like that other sprite, it's not plagiarism. It might be labelled as being inspired by.
But if you draw it from scratch, even though many parts look similar to someone else's sprite, then it's yours. As long as it doesn't look exactly like that other sprite, it's not plagiarism. It might be labelled as being inspired by.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I mean if you're making RTP styled sprites you basically can't do that without keeping, like, at least the eyes and the shape of the head, the dimensions of the sprite, and the number of frames. Realistically you probably used the general shape of the arms and legs and the placement of the shading on them as well (even if the shading is a different color). You also may have kept the same color palette, or reused the shoes of one of the sprites, or kept like 30% of the pixels that made up one guy's hair, or reused the RTP's method of creating a beard or mustache.
Are you "infringing" on the RTP by calling it your own at that point? No, you made the stupid sprite at that point, come on. That's how art works. Every piece of art is informed by other pieces of art. The only way you can ever make art without using other people's art to make it is if you were raised by wolves and you've never seen any art before.
That said use your common sense. If all you do is take one sprite's head and another's body and a third one's cape, and you combine them together and change the colors around, the term is "frankenspriting." If you do that to RTP stuff then it doesn't really belong to you, but you have the right to use it without giving credit to anyone else, because you bought those rights when you bought RPG Maker. If you do that to FF6-style stuff then you can probably expect people to call it a stolen FF6 graphic, and they're not wrong. If you do that to someone's not-quite-original RTP-style graphics, and you're not honestly sure how much the previous creator edited them from the actual RTP, and you don't really remember where you downloaded them from in the first place, then you're fucked, but the good news is no one probably cares.
Are you "infringing" on the RTP by calling it your own at that point? No, you made the stupid sprite at that point, come on. That's how art works. Every piece of art is informed by other pieces of art. The only way you can ever make art without using other people's art to make it is if you were raised by wolves and you've never seen any art before.
That said use your common sense. If all you do is take one sprite's head and another's body and a third one's cape, and you combine them together and change the colors around, the term is "frankenspriting." If you do that to RTP stuff then it doesn't really belong to you, but you have the right to use it without giving credit to anyone else, because you bought those rights when you bought RPG Maker. If you do that to FF6-style stuff then you can probably expect people to call it a stolen FF6 graphic, and they're not wrong. If you do that to someone's not-quite-original RTP-style graphics, and you're not honestly sure how much the previous creator edited them from the actual RTP, and you don't really remember where you downloaded them from in the first place, then you're fucked, but the good news is no one probably cares.
Kanto_Ruki
131
So to ask, can you tell that the smallest character here (top right):
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vk1cXQ9uKd8/S3WD_kSWO0I/AAAAAAAAAKQ/W1gjQmqnSds/s320/RPG_Maker_VX_Sprites_IMP__by_NWinmore.png
Looks at all close to these characters right here:
http://fav.me/d8mt6cn
I still need to edit the tail, and couldn't find a good alternate to the eyes...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Vk1cXQ9uKd8/S3WD_kSWO0I/AAAAAAAAAKQ/W1gjQmqnSds/s320/RPG_Maker_VX_Sprites_IMP__by_NWinmore.png
Looks at all close to these characters right here:
http://fav.me/d8mt6cn
I still need to edit the tail, and couldn't find a good alternate to the eyes...
...yes. Because the actual character design is basically the same bloody thing, just recoloured and reworked a bit. >.<;
Perhaps just ask the creator if you can use their sprite as a base for something and CREDIT them for it.
Look, frankly, if you use something as a base and draw over it, you're still USING THAT THING and thus, should credit the original creator.
If you draw inspiration and redraw it from scratch, you're still inspired by it (and thus should still give at least a passing credit or thanks for inspiring you. I mean, you don't have to but it's a good idea to remember them.)
If you want to be able to call everything custom and your own work, then do your own work. It is as simple as that.
Perhaps just ask the creator if you can use their sprite as a base for something and CREDIT them for it.
Look, frankly, if you use something as a base and draw over it, you're still USING THAT THING and thus, should credit the original creator.
If you draw inspiration and redraw it from scratch, you're still inspired by it (and thus should still give at least a passing credit or thanks for inspiring you. I mean, you don't have to but it's a good idea to remember them.)
If you want to be able to call everything custom and your own work, then do your own work. It is as simple as that.
Kanto_Ruki
131
It's harder to track the creator than I thought... The only page I can find related to the image is just an amalgamation of words and pictures crudely put together. I found a picture similar to it, but I am only finding references to the image and not the creator as he had not added any more information than just his name. You can find the image that I used by typing in "Nwinmore sprite" || "Winmore sprites" w/o quotes into an image search engine.
However, not all is lost as a couple of the characters look familiar. I can try taking my chances with those leads in the afternoon as I need sleep. Hopefully I can find it.
EDIT:
Forgot I left this open the whole time. But I went ahead to see if my lead was correct, only to find that its way off... I still can try tracking the characters down though... *OIE!*
However, not all is lost as a couple of the characters look familiar. I can try taking my chances with those leads in the afternoon as I need sleep. Hopefully I can find it.
EDIT:
Forgot I left this open the whole time. But I went ahead to see if my lead was correct, only to find that its way off... I still can try tracking the characters down though... *OIE!*
As to your questions - while it's true an original piece might look like another, depending on size, colour, shading and the like, it's actually very unlikely to be exactly like another created.
And Does telling you that I used a sprite for a base or drawing inspiration from that sprite base impact on how you consider the sprite as a whole to be original or not?
Of course it does. If you used something as a base that makes your edit not original. Full stop. You used something else to create it. It doesn't matter if you made cheese dip and then said "I made every part of this myself" - if you used cheese created by someone else, that makes it a lie. You didn't create the cheese. You used to to create something else, but you didn't create the base ingredient, so you cannot claim that you did. It's elementary.
Now, does this mean your piece is bad because of this? No. It's just not a 100% original piece and claiming that you did is a lie. It is really as simple as that.
, if drawing inspiration from something makes it not completely original, then nothing really would be original then, would it? If not, then what are the levels and fine lines of how original a specific thing can be? Is there a rating system to originality?
Look, there's no such thing as completely new ideas. Everything we create is inspired by something else. That's not a bad thing. If you create something yourself - draw an image from scratch - then it is yours UNLESS it's something that is copyrighted (but even then you do own rights to the piece itself). It's a very fine line that is very dependant on the use of the piece. If you draw art based on a character that already exists then use that art to hype your own game, you might get in trouble with the person who created the original character design. (Think chocobos - making a commercial game with chocobos will cause trouble for you because those are copyrighted designs)
If you take the idea of a bird-like creature that can be ridden, though, and work it into a creature that isn't called a chocobo or looks like one, then that should be fine to use in a commercial game. A good example are the different renditions of mythological creatures in different games/literature/etc. A ghost, a goblin, a mermaid... they all have origin points that can't rightly be traced to the original place. You can draw inspiration from them, from stories about them without much trouble. But let's say you made a character of a mermaid with long red hair and blue eyes and she has a fish friend and she falls in love with a prince and gives up her fins in order to be with him... well, you're going to get called out on it, especially if you present her as an "All original character I created!"
Also, is there a system for telling how much a sprite is similar to another sprite?
Usually it's a case of using an image edting program that allows the use of layers so that you can put one over the other and see just how it matches up against each other.
And Does telling you that I used a sprite for a base or drawing inspiration from that sprite base impact on how you consider the sprite as a whole to be original or not?
Of course it does. If you used something as a base that makes your edit not original. Full stop. You used something else to create it. It doesn't matter if you made cheese dip and then said "I made every part of this myself" - if you used cheese created by someone else, that makes it a lie. You didn't create the cheese. You used to to create something else, but you didn't create the base ingredient, so you cannot claim that you did. It's elementary.
Now, does this mean your piece is bad because of this? No. It's just not a 100% original piece and claiming that you did is a lie. It is really as simple as that.
, if drawing inspiration from something makes it not completely original, then nothing really would be original then, would it? If not, then what are the levels and fine lines of how original a specific thing can be? Is there a rating system to originality?
Look, there's no such thing as completely new ideas. Everything we create is inspired by something else. That's not a bad thing. If you create something yourself - draw an image from scratch - then it is yours UNLESS it's something that is copyrighted (but even then you do own rights to the piece itself). It's a very fine line that is very dependant on the use of the piece. If you draw art based on a character that already exists then use that art to hype your own game, you might get in trouble with the person who created the original character design. (Think chocobos - making a commercial game with chocobos will cause trouble for you because those are copyrighted designs)
If you take the idea of a bird-like creature that can be ridden, though, and work it into a creature that isn't called a chocobo or looks like one, then that should be fine to use in a commercial game. A good example are the different renditions of mythological creatures in different games/literature/etc. A ghost, a goblin, a mermaid... they all have origin points that can't rightly be traced to the original place. You can draw inspiration from them, from stories about them without much trouble. But let's say you made a character of a mermaid with long red hair and blue eyes and she has a fish friend and she falls in love with a prince and gives up her fins in order to be with him... well, you're going to get called out on it, especially if you present her as an "All original character I created!"
Also, is there a system for telling how much a sprite is similar to another sprite?
Usually it's a case of using an image edting program that allows the use of layers so that you can put one over the other and see just how it matches up against each other.
The kind of editing where you start with a blank screen and draw every part of the sprite yourself. That's when it's considered original.
Like Pizza said^
I don't think editing something ever makes it truly your own. Mainly because you had the original base to start with which wasn't your work.
I think it's really that simple. You can edit something to make it unique or your own design but the fact remains it's not soley your work.
I don't think editing something ever makes it truly your own. Mainly because you had the original base to start with which wasn't your work.
I think it's really that simple. You can edit something to make it unique or your own design but the fact remains it's not soley your work.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
What you're doing there is the pixel art equivalent of tracing.
Tracing is when you put a blank piece of paper overtop of someone else's drawing (or a photo) so that you can see the other picture behind it, and draw the outline on your paper. Then you might change the facial expression and add some extra stuff onto the clothes and put a weapon in the character's hand and trace the left arm from a different picture, and then color it in yourself. But you still traced the drawing.
Obviously, that's a perfectly fine thing to do for amateur work that you're not claiming is your own. It's an important step in learning to draw. And what you're doing with those sprites is an important step in learning how to pixel. If you don't try to make money off the game, and you credit the original author if asked, then cool.
@Pizza, no one ever starts with a blank screen. You always use references to see how to do things correctly. If you're not looking at them at the time, it's because you remember them. Every artistic technique you have was learned from somewhere. Either someone taught you how to do manual anti-aliasing around the edges of lines and shapes, or you observed it in someone else's work (or you're not doing it; shame on you). That makes it a pattern that you're copying from someone else's work.
However, to most people, there's a difference between copying the technique used for one aspect of one portion of a sprite, and copying the entire shape of the sprite and all the techniques used to make it. To me it's exactly the same, and the only difference is how many things you're copying. But my opinions on this subject are weird, apparently. You can certainly expect to get yelled at by a lot of people for doing what Kanto is doing with this sprite, and even for me that's enough of a motivation to not do it.
Also, there are only so many possible shapes for 16-bit anthro fox sprites. Maybe like a few thousand tops? And maybe a hundred of those are non-terrible. I'm sure there are more Sonic fan games out there than that, never mind all the other games with fox characters. And there are far fewer possible shapes for humans! At some point you have to admit that the base shape of any sprite you use is going to have been used by another game already; at that point the only choice you have is which game's style you're going to use.
Tracing is when you put a blank piece of paper overtop of someone else's drawing (or a photo) so that you can see the other picture behind it, and draw the outline on your paper. Then you might change the facial expression and add some extra stuff onto the clothes and put a weapon in the character's hand and trace the left arm from a different picture, and then color it in yourself. But you still traced the drawing.
Obviously, that's a perfectly fine thing to do for amateur work that you're not claiming is your own. It's an important step in learning to draw. And what you're doing with those sprites is an important step in learning how to pixel. If you don't try to make money off the game, and you credit the original author if asked, then cool.
@Pizza, no one ever starts with a blank screen. You always use references to see how to do things correctly. If you're not looking at them at the time, it's because you remember them. Every artistic technique you have was learned from somewhere. Either someone taught you how to do manual anti-aliasing around the edges of lines and shapes, or you observed it in someone else's work (or you're not doing it; shame on you). That makes it a pattern that you're copying from someone else's work.
However, to most people, there's a difference between copying the technique used for one aspect of one portion of a sprite, and copying the entire shape of the sprite and all the techniques used to make it. To me it's exactly the same, and the only difference is how many things you're copying. But my opinions on this subject are weird, apparently. You can certainly expect to get yelled at by a lot of people for doing what Kanto is doing with this sprite, and even for me that's enough of a motivation to not do it.
Also, there are only so many possible shapes for 16-bit anthro fox sprites. Maybe like a few thousand tops? And maybe a hundred of those are non-terrible. I'm sure there are more Sonic fan games out there than that, never mind all the other games with fox characters. And there are far fewer possible shapes for humans! At some point you have to admit that the base shape of any sprite you use is going to have been used by another game already; at that point the only choice you have is which game's style you're going to use.
Pages:
1
