100.jpg)
The fairly pleasant if a bit prone to artist's outburst, Chillyplasma appears to be making and selling Heroine prints. He's done some commission stuff for me in the past and I've been quite happy with it so thought I would drop a heads up on here thus potentially helping him out and letting you surly lot spend any Paypal vouchers your dear little old white haired grannies might have sent you (I know granny Tallyho certainly must do this and probably throws in a bag of weathers originals too)
http://fav.me/d9n29f9
Chap on Deviant Art selling Heroine Prints
You know you are getting old when you can't say 'Werthers'. Unless you meant Jim WEATHERS. I steal his sweets all the time.
I'll have you know, I'm still hip, I know the jive daddio and can get down with the youth gone wild.
After I left college I was a teenage tearaway.
That's right....I was a rebel without a course.
(Sorry!)
Ta for the link.
I'll have you know, I'm still hip, I know the jive daddio and can get down with the youth gone wild.
After I left college I was a teenage tearaway.
That's right....I was a rebel without a course.
(Sorry!)
Ta for the link.
How strange are the ways of the gods ...........and how cruel.
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
That's putting it mildly.lionbadger wrote:a bit prone to artist's outburst
-
lionbadger
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 786
- Joined: 12 years ago
Should have put my typing glasses on,
curse you old father time and your inevitable march!
curse you old father time and your inevitable march!
$100 for prints that uses photos that he doesn't even own the rights to? Don't mean to offend your intentions, but that guy is pretty much an asshole and basically a petulant child. Most of his "art" is basically taking people's photos without credit and he paints over them. He is beyond condescending, not realizing he's a hack, and not a good one at that either. I honestly don't understand how people put up with him.
To be fair, he's not selling you the photo, but you are commissioning his time
You're paying for his time to modify an image.
As a scale, a hundred dollars at minimum wage (around 15 dollars) is about six to seven hours of unskilled labor.
Consider how long it takes to work on one of his photomanips. I have no clue, but i know from experience that it can be pretty time consuming, especially if you're going for quality over quantity. Then consider this is skilled labour, not unskilled. It's not obnoxiously unfair, its what he considers the market will bare, because he does get work it seems.
If people dont like his prices, they dont have to pay it, and that's that.
Not right to drag him through the dirt when he's not around to defend himself, but where i do find fault with him is his attitude isnt an unfair assessment of at least how i view him..
You're paying for his time to modify an image.
As a scale, a hundred dollars at minimum wage (around 15 dollars) is about six to seven hours of unskilled labor.
Consider how long it takes to work on one of his photomanips. I have no clue, but i know from experience that it can be pretty time consuming, especially if you're going for quality over quantity. Then consider this is skilled labour, not unskilled. It's not obnoxiously unfair, its what he considers the market will bare, because he does get work it seems.
If people dont like his prices, they dont have to pay it, and that's that.
Not right to drag him through the dirt when he's not around to defend himself, but where i do find fault with him is his attitude isnt an unfair assessment of at least how i view him..
Sure, you can pay him for his time, but does he pay for the rights to license the photos that he blatantly uses? No. He doesn't even credit them, and when someone calls him out on it, he blocks them. Then he has the hypocritical audacity to complain that other people post his "art" without permission.
-
digitalbleh
- Staff Sargeant
- Posts: 184
- Joined: 9 years ago
it2007: Can you show us an example of images that he has stolen? Or are you talking about the rights that (marvel/dc etc) own to their characters.
-
Chillyplasma
- Neophyte
- Posts: 1
- Joined: 8 years ago
Yes, I would like to see examples too.
Was it any of these?
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=12
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 96813&qo=6
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=13
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=19
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=21
Whoops, if you think there are photos present in any of those you need glasses. Here are the photos that were the inspirations/guides for the above:
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 1452392894
It's like when I look at a bowl of fruit and paint it. My images were (digitally) hand painted. Look at the photos again it2007, if you're saying I use photos you're either saying I'm hugely talented or you're very stupid.
Granted it was not always this way, some time between starting 20 years ago and now I got better. Then again it2007 was probably a nice kid, it took him effort to become an abusive hater.
As for my attitude... "prone to artist's outburst" "asshole" "a petulant child" "beyond condescending" "he's a hack, and not a good one"
I get this every day. People go out of their way to be haters because I won't bend over and service their perversions for free.
How's your attitude?
Was it any of these?
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=12
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 96813&qo=6
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=13
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=19
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 6813&qo=21
Whoops, if you think there are photos present in any of those you need glasses. Here are the photos that were the inspirations/guides for the above:
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... 1452392894
It's like when I look at a bowl of fruit and paint it. My images were (digitally) hand painted. Look at the photos again it2007, if you're saying I use photos you're either saying I'm hugely talented or you're very stupid.
Granted it was not always this way, some time between starting 20 years ago and now I got better. Then again it2007 was probably a nice kid, it took him effort to become an abusive hater.
As for my attitude... "prone to artist's outburst" "asshole" "a petulant child" "beyond condescending" "he's a hack, and not a good one"
I get this every day. People go out of their way to be haters because I won't bend over and service their perversions for free.
How's your attitude?
Is he selling the prints through DA because they don't let me sell my art which is similar to his in that we make copyrighted heroines. Don't see how he would be able to unless he uses a different place to print them.
I believe the 'base' unaltered photo is what's being questioned here. With out the base model and photo, there would be nothing to manipulate.digitalbleh wrote:it2007: Can you show us an example of images that he has stolen? Or are you talking about the rights that (marvel/dc etc) own to their characters.
Probably not through DA.LordSnot wrote:Is he selling the prints through DA because they don't let me sell my art which is similar to his in that we make copyrighted heroines. Don't see how he would be able to unless he uses a different place to print them.
I have no idea how DA works, personally when i take commissions, it's through Paypal. I dont know for certain but, I imagine he has similar arrangements.
Virtually every single piece he has posted comes from a photo that someone else shot. The only things he "paints" are the costume paintovers and sometimes the restraints. Otherwise, it's all photomanipulation. It looks like in his recent stuff he finally decided to paint over the faces, most likely to justify it being more of "his" work as opposed to the work of the original photographers/models. But it's clear to me the faces are purely meant to hide the photos underneath, since the new pieces where he does paint the faces, they look pretty warped and are just plain bad all around. He somehow managed to make Andrea Neal look bad.digitalbleh wrote:it2007: Can you show us an example of images that he has stolen?
See the attached image. Like I wrote, he's only starting to paint over the faces in the recent images, probably as a response to the copyright/credit complaints. Note he doesn't give any credit to Shortfuse and Water Bondage for the photos. Because I was a big fan of the late Cory Thompson (Shortfuse) from back in the day, I instantly recognized a bunch of them. There are plenty more in his gallery, below are just two examples that I can find images for.
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... -284037898
http://chillyplasma.deviantart.com/art/ ... -504470158
- Attachments
-
- ripoff.jpg (163.45 KiB) Viewed 4756 times
I dunno, it gets a fuzzy, imho.
If he were doing the work, and getting it put out for something commercial, like a book cover or something, then yes. He's way in the wrong and looking for a copyright lawsuit.
If he's being commissioned to spend his time to work on a public domain photograph, for someone to use privately or in a non-profit sort of manner it gets a little more fuzzy. He's being paid for his time, to do private work for someone. He's not making a profit on it beyond what is reasonable for him spending time on the project. If he's getting sued for the work, what profit is there to reclaim for damages. So is he really in the wrong here?
Mind you, i still dont like his attitude, but it doesnt hurt to look at it from his point of view.
Regardless, I think were getting off topic from the original intent of the thread.
If he were doing the work, and getting it put out for something commercial, like a book cover or something, then yes. He's way in the wrong and looking for a copyright lawsuit.
If he's being commissioned to spend his time to work on a public domain photograph, for someone to use privately or in a non-profit sort of manner it gets a little more fuzzy. He's being paid for his time, to do private work for someone. He's not making a profit on it beyond what is reasonable for him spending time on the project. If he's getting sued for the work, what profit is there to reclaim for damages. So is he really in the wrong here?
Mind you, i still dont like his attitude, but it doesnt hurt to look at it from his point of view.
Regardless, I think were getting off topic from the original intent of the thread.
-
digitalbleh
- Staff Sargeant
- Posts: 184
- Joined: 9 years ago
He clearly has used both images posted in the example, he may not be selling those two but i would assume that waterbondage and shortfuse do have a copyright on their own works, and on chillys deviant art page he has a "©2012-2016 ChillyPlasma" which is wrong in itself. Making a profit or just a hobby does not really matter if he does not credit the original artist.
He is however selling those prints the OP has pasted in the link, so if he is making a profit on them and their stolen too that would be sad.
Kitten: People sue each other all the time, even if not profit has been made, you can still lose the case and be made to pay out, or go bankrupt. I also do not think this is off topic, as if i was going to purchase a print of someone id want to know it was made by them, i do not think someone deserves money by copying someone else's work and adding a little more too it.
He is however selling those prints the OP has pasted in the link, so if he is making a profit on them and their stolen too that would be sad.
Kitten: People sue each other all the time, even if not profit has been made, you can still lose the case and be made to pay out, or go bankrupt. I also do not think this is off topic, as if i was going to purchase a print of someone id want to know it was made by them, i do not think someone deserves money by copying someone else's work and adding a little more too it.