kobaltkween opened this issue on May 18, 2007 ยท 102 posts
Zarat posted Sun, 20 May 2007 at 6:21 PM
@cobaltdream: One possible way to interpret ghonmas statement would be this:
Someone should mention it if he uses a model made by someone else.
If the any figure, hair, texture, cloth is not done by the creator of the particular picture and this fact is not mentioned along with the picture in question then it's prejudice.
It's the prejudice of that creator that other can read his mind. They lack this skill and thus is OK if they mention this bad project documentation. The wording is secondary at best.
And I would add:
The workflow should also be documented.
Figures posed in Poser but rendered in Max is not the same as completely done in Poser or Max. Postworked in Gimp or PS is not the same as postworked in Mirage...
But this is now easy enough to be continued without much explanations and examples.
If the documentation is done correctly there is no point to criticise other than the artistic value and the technical execution.
Sadly this means again that finding the reason for prejudice would require psychological analysis. Something I doubt any mortal human being can do without good knowledge about the people in question.
Can you explain to me why my neighbour reacted with the words
What works is asking the neighbor himself why he reacted like he did. Often that won't give you more than a bunch of lies because humans are humans, but with some more questioning you come closer to the truth.
Ergo, the question asked here is not based on logic and no specification can make it logical.
The question how those people who respond here would react under all the given circumstances is a valid logical question.
Maybe this sounds a bit blunt, but you seem to be to focused on finding a truth where none can be found. To interpret requires already to be unbiased.
Thus spoke Zarathustra: The path of the creator.