Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
March 28, 2008
Image Size
5.9 KB
Resolution
99×56
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
24,795 (2 today)
Favourites
3,159 (who?)
Comments
428
Downloads
123
×
Recoloring Is Not Art -Stamp by AdventureIslands Recoloring Is Not Art -Stamp by AdventureIslands
Every time you favorite this stamp without checking rest of my gallery, god kills a kitten.

Please, think of the kittens.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
RANT TIME!

Listen kids: as much you might like that stupid Naruto picture you found with Google or how cool that Sonic spriteset might look, changing their colors doesn't make them your art nor your original characters.

Turning Sonic's fur red and shoes black with Paint and giving some stupid name like Fire the Hedgehog is not only really lame and unoriginal, but it is not true art or real original character either. Adding stuff like cape or etc. is not going to help. Giving Naruto character different colored clothes and editing hairdo is also a sign of lack of imagination too.

And if you still Instinct to make those cheap edits, then for God's sake, don't post them to deviantArt, this is not Photobucket!

Read the Copyright Policy! [link]

[/Rant]

My first stamp ever. I just got really mad for seeing all these cheap and lame sprite and character edits, and I couldn't find a existing anti-recoloring stamp, I decided to make my own.

Besides seeing stolen art and other Copyright Policy violating material here in dA, seeing unoriginal and cheap recolorings drives me nuts!
Add a Comment:
 
:iconthelittlekatze:
thelittlekatze Apr 2, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
you're right. It's not art. It's art theft!
Reply
:iconkamentantei:
Kamentantei Mar 22, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
This is why I draw fan art freehand, that's the legal way of drawing copyrighted fan art. I can't stand recoloring. It's fun on your computer but putting it up online is just stupid. My one friend on here recolors stuff all the time and steals and plagiarizes and while people have told her no, she still doesn't understand and continues to steal art. My fanart is under fan art for a reason-that's what it is, and it won't be up for sale because the characters I draw don't belong to me.

These kinds of people give fan artists like me a bad name. None of my drawings are traced or recolored in any way. I do it all myself, through looking at something and drawing it. The stuff may not belong to me, but my 'copy' can be safely said to belong to me as long as I don't sell it. You'd think people would get the hint and stop stealing.
Reply
:iconwthappened:
WTHappened Mar 22, 2014  Student General Artist
Totally agree
Reply
:iconbulleus:
Bulleus Feb 13, 2014  Student Digital Artist
I beg to differ... recoloring is also art. I believe it is a form of dadaism art. It's not cheap and it's not lack of imagination. Unless you consider Pop art cheap and lacks imaginations as well.

There's nothing wrong with "Turning Sonic's fur red and shoes black with Paint and giving some stupid name like Fire the Hedgehog". Though it's unoriginal, it's still a form of art.
You are right about one thing, though - they're not original characters. But, rather, characters that is strongly based and inspired with...

I don't know why but the Copyright Policy link is broken or something... might just be my computer though.
Reply
:icondreamsphereinc:
DreamsphereINC Feb 20, 2014  Student General Artist
Actually, using an artists works without their permission IS art theft, and it's not artwork if you're not originally doing the work yourself.

Colouring over someone else's artwork isn't art, it's illegal.
Reply
:iconbulleus:
Bulleus Feb 20, 2014  Student Digital Artist
HAHAHA YES! I ARGEE on that one!. Not unless its free in the internet. It's like your saying that it's illegal to color a coloring book.
Furthermore, maybe if they cite the owner of that artwork and recolor it as means of a fanart, then its still considered as Art.
And, coloring over someone else's artwork may not be illegal if it is completely overpainted to a whole new art. But if not, Yes, it is ILLEGAL.

and because you were the only one who opposed me, I like you!
Reply
:icondreamsphereinc:
DreamsphereINC Feb 20, 2014  Student General Artist
Colouring a books and original artwork are two completely different things.

Colouring books are published for the purpose of colouring.

Artists work are not. 

Furthermore, maybe if they cite the owner of that artwork and recolor it as means of a fanart, then its still considered as Art.


According to deviantart, no it's not. Nor is it "Fanart." 


Recoloring is indisputably art theft, and if you are caught/reported in with your recolour, you WILL BE BANNED FROM DEVIANTART FOR ART THEFT.

...also, who the hell would take an artists beautiful work that they spends hours, even DAYS working on, and just completely destroy it by covering it over?

Reply
:iconbulleus:
Bulleus Feb 20, 2014  Student Digital Artist
FAQ #306: Does "Crediting" let me use whatever I want?

According to deviantart, no it's not. Nor is it "Fanart."
so your saying fanarts are illegal?  Considering that this is a fact, then all fanarts are illegal due to stolen art, specifically the Original Character.
Because they have no permission to use the original character and only cited sources of the original creator.
ummm... what?

...also, who the hell would take an artists beautiful work that they
spends hours, even DAYS working on, and just completely destroy
it by covering it over?

well, I didn't meant it that way. I meant using the artwork as references. Like photographs. I do that in my photographs.
Plus, it's also a practice to overpaint artworks such as photographs.

Colouring books are published for the purpose of colouring.

LOL, Yes, you gotta point there.

Reply
:icondreamsphereinc:
DreamsphereINC Feb 20, 2014  Student General Artist
Fanart is originally designed work using previously designed characters, FOR THE ORIGINAL ARISTS, and crediting them for the character.

Fanart is NOT recolouring the original artists works. 
Reply
:iconbulleus:
Bulleus Feb 20, 2014  Student Digital Artist
Fanarts are not originally designed work. Fanarts copies and redraws of the original designed work of the true creator. By design, we mean the design of the character itself.

Nope, fanarts are not recoloring and I never said it was in the first place. Instead, I was stating that NOT ALL recolored arts are ILLEGAL and are considered as ART.
For example, pop arts. I've seen some pop arts that are just recolored of the original photos which they do not own. And They're in an exhibit.
I was not stating that they are all legal... but rather I was stating that they are CONSIDERED as arts as well. C:

(LOL, I like you very much... )
Reply
Add a Comment: