Civ V stock image Scavenger hunt

Image hunting is fun. Legal mumbo-jumbo is not.

There should be two separate threads for these two things (with image one heavily moderated, to prevent OT).


P.S.
Some of the images on which games icons were based should be available as Avatars. :D
 
Moderator Action: I don't think we need to continue to actually discuss what this thread should be about; posting that the thread is moving away from discussion about the images is a rather self-fulfilling prophecy. 'Less talk, more pictures' would be a good idea.

And if you've a problem with a post, please report it.
:)
 
I tried finding a match, but could only find yours. The source and outcome seem to point the asset was an interpretation based on numerous sources and inspirations (aka: an original piece). Perhaps the following were also used as sources:


Interestingly enough, that was one of the more striking images I remember from the really cool Civ2 wonder videos. Now those were awesome.

I'm guessing this one was an original. I don't think I've ever seen the Colossus from that angle before.
 
the heroic epic is clearly based on a photo of the imo jima memorial, however it's not a 1:1 match, the people have been moved slightly with respect to each other

 
manhattan project
there are a lot of pictures of fat man mockups, i suspect this one could have been the source. the angle is a match, and the position of the primary glare matches.



i had no luck finding the newspaper? background
 
Here's a fun one, the seaport. Did a search for seaport and one of the hits was a painting which was close, so then I tried "seaport painting" and bam there it was:



Obviously been adjusted a bit for the icon. The painting is entitled Seaport with the Embarkation of St. Ursula

EDIT: And the ship they added is a re-colored version of the Frigate icon :)
 
How's that, then...?

Edited extensively -- again.

PS; most probably why i decided (all by myself, without recommendations or opinions) to use a Templar Knight for Medieval or a Gladiator for Classical Eras, btw.
 

Attachments

  • Urania_fig01.jpg
    Urania_fig01.jpg
    169.2 KB · Views: 193
This was on saturday night, I had the idea from a member at the 2k forums Xur, who replied:

Maybe you should email some of those that have copyright for the images, and see what they think Pretty sure you will never see anyone from 2K post in here - they tend to only comment on positive news or something that can boost sales.

Why not?



This image belongs to the Ben Franklin Tercentenary, the actor portraying Ben Franklin is Bill Ochester, here are the links for both:

"http://www.bfranklinprinter.com/
http://www.benfranklin300.org/

And here is the link from where the image came from:
http://www.benfranklin300.org/imagebank_02_detail.html

And here is what it says about image usage right at the Ben Franklin Tercentenary website:
Photo Usage Agreement

This image MAY BE used for editorial purposes in magazines, newspapers and online to promote Philadelphia, with GPTMC byline credit. It MAY NOT be used for advertising or promotional efforts.

So on saturday night I wrote to the Ben Franklin Tercentenary, presented the case and got an answer, here is the exchange as it follows:

Hi, I am a graphic designer currently studying the art assets of the video game civilization V, very recently we have found out that many of the Art assets of the game are in fact based on stock images. There has been rampant speculation to whether or not this practice was legitimate. The picture in question is "Ben Franklin 300 Philadelphia Press Conference", the game utilizes the image masking it in a not too subtle way. The direct link follows below to an example of the image as it looks in the game:

(link to the image)

We have been wondering as Civilization V fans, and in my case as an artist trying to break into the industry if this practice is acceptable and if the image was leased or if permission was granted.

Regards

And here's the reply I received:

Hi -- The image on the right (the new art) is based on a photograph of a Franklin re-enactor, who was part of a press conference we held a few years ago. The Benjamin Franklin Tercentenary owns the rights to these photographs and they should not be considered "stock" photos and permission should be sought if our photographs are used. In this case, I feel the permission needed should also have been sought from the Franklin re-enactor, as it is his face being used in the new art. He is a working actor, who is paid for his interpretations of Franklin and I can imagine he would want a say in whether or not his image is in the game!

Hope this helps,

Rosalind Remer, Ph.D.

I have also written to mr. Ochester, who's actually a really kind guy that took the time to reply to me that he was surprised about this situation as well. It's a bit sad this happened, no longer can we just speculate about if the images were wrongfully appropriated, we have now an example that points towards this likely being the case.

Someone might reply "but if you've never told them, then they would have never known!"... but that's not how it works, I also don't I am manufacturing a controversy out of nothing either (there have been plenty of examples so far). I don't think I or anyone else who has uncovered any of the pictures should be shunned if at a certain point we question the how and why, rather than sit back and just continue the circus. I don't think it's funny or amusing anymore.

I still have not written to Firaxis yet, I have been waiting for 2kGreg to answer me, but so far no response (it's the weekend though).
 
If they didn't have enough time, that's still no excuse for ripping off other people's work.

That smacks of either laziness or a lack of integrity.

I really disagree on that one. These icons are really about visual identification and catching the "archetype" of the subject involved.

Googling the subject, to see for yourself which pictures fit the bill, is probably the efficient way to do this. I'm sure this way irons away many nitty-gritty "errors", where an icon is not a clear visualitation of the subject it portrais.
 
the heroic epic is clearly based on a photo of the imo jima memorial, however it's not a 1:1 match, the people have been moved slightly with respect to each other


If you found a photo that's a contender, let's see what you got.
 
I still have not written to Firaxis yet, I have been waiting for 2kGreg to answer me, but so far no response (it's the weekend though).

Why should Greg or Firaxis reply at all?

The e-mail you received doesn't even address whether or not permission was granted, simply that permission should be sought and that the art appears to be based on the picture. Whether or not Firaxis had permission to use it was not answered at all (and probably wouldn't be answered, even if you asked).

At this point, anything about this is between Firaxis and the Benjamin Franklin Tercentenary, it does not involve you, and they're under no obligation to let you know about any decision or follow-up on this.

What I actually find most amusing is that you posted the e-mail here. I have a sneaking suspicion you didn't ask if it was alright to post the private e-mail on a public forum. :p
 
Okay, probably my last statement on these matters:

Really, if Firaxis wanted to have access to a huge pool of graphical assets (which definitely makes sense when you're working on a Civ game), then they could have obtained a license for one of the bigger image collections, like they did for the Civ2 wonder movies. It's not particularly difficult to obtain such a license, it just costs money.

If they didn't obtain such a license, and created derivative works without permission (and from looking at the pictures, there simply isn't any workable legal basis to cover those under "fair use" or "artistic freedom"), then there is a problem. This problem has been created by the people who used images without permission, not by the people who noticed the issue. Shooting the messenger doesn't solve the problem either.

I'll say that I wouldn't have contacted the copyright holders, simply because I don't feel strongly enough about it. However, I can absolutely understand that someone who earns his money with art _does_ feel stronger about it, and wants the matter rectified. If someone violated laws or honor codes which are important to _my_ profession, I'd feel strongly about it as well. And if someone made money off of anything _I_ created, I'd actually appreciate someone to tell me about it.

Finally, to the people who think that this matter shouldn't be discussed: Imagine someone takes all the strategy guides and "game stories" from Civfanatics, without even asking, adds them to a collection of other stuff, and then publishes all of it as a book, for a good price. He also edits the texts, thereby creating a derivative work. Then, someone notices what has happened and starts a thread on CFC about it. Would you _still_ think that the matter shouldn't be discussed or "just stirs up trouble"? Or do you think that the book author should have at least asked, and perhaps given out a couple of complimentary copies - or even some small monetary compensation for the work that others did and that he simply took and used? What I'm trying to say is: Please think about both sides of the issue, and don't let your sympathies persuade you to shoot messengers, or hide inconvenient facts.
 
Top Bottom