Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/members.ez?Who=acva

Maybe they just got Teed off and left like alot of others did...? Listen I see folks all of the time applying Greyscaled Photgraphs in the Terrain Editor then applying the Color Version of the photo for the Texture...What is wrong with that...? This is what Bryce can do and there should be Nothing wrong with that...Dont you see alot of the Higher End Software use Video Footage in their 3D animations and Such,Especially in the Movies...They also use Stills in their works too. Now I personally would come out and say WHO Cares.... It all comes down to Personal Satisfaction of Useing the Program to Enhance your Art... I am here Not to judge anyone and I am not here to Piss off anyone...

congratulations. you must feel all warm and cozy inside.

who should we attack next.

Hey- I'm not here to piss anyone off either, and I think photos can and do enhance a lot of works and are used to great effect in many works. It's just that the wolves were a blatant rip-off and I don't think there was any injustice done by Incarnadine or any of the other members that pointed out the fact. If the work is your's or you use photos and the original is given credit, great. But, to use an image and pass it off as your own is blatantly wrong. Only point I was trying to make.

I agree with you tempest967. I don't have problems with any artists using Bryce in any way they wish. The resulting work might not be to my personal taste, but so what? The only thing I have a problem with is someone ripping-off an artist, or photographer without permission or any attribution of the original work. Also someone claiming they modeled something when it is in fact clearly a photograph chaps my hide. I despise a fraud.

foley and xenic, how does the photo-terrain work compare to putting up a photo of a hummingbird and claiming it's Bryce? Or that church graveyard? Did you see Flak claiming the grass transmaps he used were modelled in Bryce? Did you see Zhann claiming that her drape was anything but greyscale terrain work? After all, did you see me claiming the sky in my After the Rain was pure Bryce? Personal satisfaction is one thing, but lying is completely another.

Well put Erlik. Copyright Policy / Renderosity

what is with the curch grave yard? i clearly stated is was modeled in blender and rendered in bryce. if you had any thing against it you should have said in my own post erlik.

My point may have been misunderstood. I'll try again, without the sarcasm.
Dude was wrong. The lynch mob that dragged him through the public forum, assaulted his gallery, and burned him at the stake was wronger.
Good start ICM, here are some more links of interest:

Welcome to the Bryce Forum!
**
Forum Moderator: AgentSmith
Coordinators:Zhann**- - - - - -

**
Renderositys Policy Concerning Claims of Copyright Infringement

**- Copyright Notification - Official Notification of Claim of Infringement

• Response to Claim - Official Communication of Response to Claim of Infringement

Welcome to the Bryce Gallery.
For WIP reviews, tutorials, resources and Monthly Challenge info visit the Bryce Forum. The Bryce Gallery and Forum is supervised by AgentSmith and Zhann.

Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions and/or comments.

xenic101

The wolves were a blatant rip off and were actionable in terms of copyright law. Intent to defraud was signalled by posting a wireframe as an attempt to prove the works were acva's. Acva is still liable if L. Kromshroeder decides to pursue the matter due to loss of revenue from free distribution of for sale licensed prints.

WE DO NOT NEED SUCH BEHAVIOUR IN ANY WAY ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE! In addition, regarding the two comments I posted on his images, the first was a helpful comment on compositing technique when icorporating 3d into or onto 2d images. The second about scanning and cropping off the artists name, I am prepared to stand behind in court as my personal opinion of what he had done.

Message edited on: 06/22/2005 18:28

Er, not your graveyard, ysvry. It's got nothing to do with the matter. That guy with the hummingbird put a photo of an Irish church graveyard in his gallery and said it was a Bryce render. Most there could be 3D was one tombstone in mid-distance, so I doubt anything was 3D. xenic, you know, I could kinda feel for that guy, depending on his motives. If there was one motive, he's ... almost blameless and is to be pitied. If there was another, burning at stake is too good. Most of us take this pretty seriously. We devote time and effor to create our images. Why do you think there's such uproar about Hot20 regularly? Yeah, we are all vain, so we take the images from there and such fakes as the hummingbird and the graveyard as a spit in our face. So I completely understand the reaction. Ah, hell, I'm in no emotional state to discuss something like this. No connection to the thread itself, but sorry, that's all from me. At least for tonight.

The church was a photo and that was proved. Fine, whatever, use photos, add props and render your heart out. At the very least, give credit for the photo. But, the sticking point xenic are the pictures of the wolves that were in acva's gallery, all of them were licensed prints by very real world artists. How is exposing something so blatant more wrong than the theft it self? The very thought that you think calling a thief out and exposing them and ridiculing their acts as wrong, is more wrong than the theft itself is a bit confusing. If it were your art, would you be so lenient? I think pretty much anyone would want that person exposed, and at the very least, a public apology. I think the community would be more apt to forgive if an apology were made. Look, there is no doubt that acva has a degree of creativity, some of the posts were pretty good, so why deceive with someone else's work when you're capable of creating your own, isn't that the point. It's one thing to be inspired by art, I think that's why we do what we do...we're inspired by others to create our own, I don't think despite the saying "good artists borrow, great artists steal" was ever meant to be taken so literally.

Never, ever, use someone's copyrighted work in yours unless you attribute it and you can publicly state that you have the originator's permission. This is not just courtesy, it is the law! In my latest work for example, lemonjim was kind enough to grant me the use of one of his images and I so attributed it.

ic erlik,sorry for the misunderstanding, something completly diffrent, ive been trying to get a mustek scanner to work with my xp used to work fine untill i installed a dia scanner now it keeps telling me fail load in broken english , 3 hours wasted , numerable restarts, and i know ive got it working before when i upgraded to xp. this sucks.:(

hmm actually all i hate to bring this up. I looked at those images and even though some of them were photos(IMO), the one with the arch over the water and the building in it were done with actual 3d models, both of which i have seen on either 3dcommune or turbosquid, some of the forground trees and bushes in it are models..my god you guys couldn't pick them all out to be models..Well good on him/her for being able to make an image that made it hard to pick the models out. CD (Back to the real world)

Hey CD, those weren't the real issue. It was the unattributed and non-permissioned use of a known artists publicly copyrighted commercial work and the lie about it. That was the crime (literally!). In a way though, I am sorry about all this as acva showed potential in some of his actual bryce works and that is gone from here. That does not in any way lessen the criminality of his actions though. I think we have had enough of this issue. I intend to drop it myself now. Richard

then it ok to use photos and fractals you made? or see a photo in photograpy and get a ideal to use it and ask the artist if you can use it and give him credit? that what i do to the best able way i can and sent the artist a Note that I use his/her image. Some they say to me ok but donot use they name for what ever reason they have. I can give the mods the name and they can check with the artist themselfs. I hope this is ok with you all

You must have explicit permission to use the artist's work before you post or exhibit in any manner. Not only that but you should let the artist see the usage before publication, so that they may be fully informed as to consent. In regard to your second issue, as long as you can produce the records of permission you are ok or can have the artist state so if required.