Civ V stock image Scavenger hunt

[punctuator]

Construction:

 

[aimlessgun]

Has it been established that artists were not properly compensated for their work by Firaxis?

Unless people were not compensated properly, I find all this fine. The images look good. They provided me with a quality product. If they arrived at that product in a manner that didn't screw people, I'm fine with that. I would never know the images were 'unoriginal' if not for the thread

 

[AlpsStranger]

Excellent thread.

Firaxis should be ashamed of themselves.

Anyway, a lot of these graphics certainly do look organic! (Not home grown though. )

Meh.

You're going to have to find another righteous cause. This has gone on since the dark ages of PC gaming and will continue until the end.

 

[OrsonM]

Has it been established that artists were not properly compensated for their work by Firaxis?

Unless people were not compensated properly, I find all this fine. The images look good. They provided me with a quality product. If they arrived at that product in a manner that didn't screw people, I'm fine with that. I would never know the images were 'unoriginal' if not for the thread

There are 4 confirmed cases of artists that have stated that permision was not pursued (or paid for). There are a few were the image is either public domain or under creative commons (which would grant a creative commons license to those icons as well). One of them even commented here too!

Lastly Firaxis has just ignored the issue (email them if you don't believe me to get no reply at all). It's a bit unethical and just plain lazy for any graphic designer to follow this technique. Most graphic designers use a myriad of references and interpret them into an original piece (also to avoid a copyright violation). Many of these icons are just disappointing carbon copies (at least in my opinnion as a graphic designer myself).

And we are aware there are many other cases by other companies (many have been presented here too), but that doesn't make it right either.

Civilization V is a great game in my opinion, I'm just not too happy about this issue.

 

[Buccaneer]

Carbon copy??? BS. You have not shown a single one that was a carbon copy (if you understand what that means). A lot of them were inspired by a single source but none were carbon copies. Prove it.

 

[aimlessgun]

There are 4 confirmed cases of artists that have stated that permision was not pursued (or paid for). There are a few were the image is either public domain or under creative commons (which would grant a creative commons license to those icons as well). One of them even commented here too!

Lastly Firaxis has just ignored the issue (email them if you don't believe me to get no reply at all). It's a bit unethical and just plain lazy for any graphic designer to follow this technique. Most graphic designers use a myriad of references and interpret them into an original piece (also to avoid a copyright violation). Many of these icons are just disappointing carbon copies (at least in my opinnion as a graphic designer myself).

And we are aware there are many other cases by other companies (many have been presented here too), but that doesn't make it right either.

Civilization V is a great game in my opinion, I'm just not too happy about this issue.

Ah I see. Well that sucks.

As for copying images that are fairly used though, for me it makes a difference that these are tiny little icons, of which there are hundreds. I'm not going to judge them as art, more as whether they get the job done in the game or not

 

[OrsonM]

Ah I see. Well that sucks.

As for copying images that are fairly used though, for me it makes a difference that these are tiny little icons, of which there are hundreds. I'm not going to judge them as art, more as whether they get the job done in the game or not

Yeah, there was still work done on these, they do look like part of a whole indeed. Just kinda wish they were made a bit differently, I mean there's a lot in the game that's already really original, why drop the ball here?.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

It's a bit unethical and just plain lazy for any graphic designer to follow this technique.

AFAIC, you've already lost the ethical game by persisting on your attacks of any Firaxis' staff or artists that were contracted and paid to create what we all bought.
You simply misrepresented a hunt thread for corresponding sources to match with artwork and whatever isn't original enough (in YOUR opinion) must have been stolen.

On every opportunity, you're questioning their integrity.
In law terms, it's called derogatory.

Just stop repeating the same arguments pages after pages of this silly line of thought -- you simply do not understand Art itself and how creativity is an absolutely legal device performed and operated by and within the Gaming Industry for a price paid to talented individuals.

End_Of_Story.

Moderator Action: Please be civil.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Putmalk]

Carbon copy??? BS. You have not shown a single one that was a carbon copy (if you understand what that means). A lot of them were inspired by a single source but none were carbon copies. Prove it.

I posted the Louvre one page back, that should be proof enough.

But I really don't care about the issue. I think it's a completely pointless topic to argue. I thought this thread was about finding them, not incriminating Firaxis? What's the fun in that?

 

[King_Course]

It's very cool to have my work in my favorite computer game but at the same time disappointing to not get credit. Just because I publish my photos on the Internet doesn't mean I give up copyright. As evidenced in this thread, changing original art slightly doesn't really fool anyone. It only makes you look like a dick.

Comeon...

 

[AlpsStranger]

And we are aware there are many other cases by other companies (many have been presented here too), but that doesn't make it right either.

It doesn't make it right, but it makes some of the over the top moralizing in this thread ridiculous.

 

[Thormodr]

It doesn't make it right, but it makes some of the over the top moralizing in this thread ridiculous.

It's part and parcel of the same thing.

It isn't just Firaxis that is doing this either so this isn't mindless Civilization 5 bashing.
Frankly, if Paradox Interactive, Runic Games or Stardock (companies I respect) were found to be doing the same thing, I'd call them out too. It's called doing what's right. There is no over the top moralizing.

The truly sad thing it could be fixed for literally a few hundred dollars. A fraction of the profit that Civilization 5 has made.

 

[AlpsStranger]

EDIT: Nevermind. I just ended up venting on Stardock. I'm a traumatized Elemental owner so you'll have to forgive me.

 

[Rubberjello]

This is not at all surprising to me.
I have two sons that just graduated from High School after taking a Computer Graphic Design course (as an elective) their entire Senior year. Parents were invited to see their portfolio at the end of the year.

As you might have guessed by now, about 95% of their projects involved taking available images and modifying/overlaying/converting them. Only one project restricted images to all original artwork. I can only surmise that all those graphic design trade schools out there have similar curriculum and standards.

Entire generations of future graphic designers are being trained to do what this thread is pointing out. There is little hope for change unless employers and their customers insist or expect original artwork.

 

[JohnnyW]

On every opportunity, you're questioning their integrity.
In law terms, it's called derogatory.

Unless a statement is libellous or slanderous then it isn't actionable. For a statement to be either one of those it must be false.

I think you need a brush up on your legal education my friend.

End_Of_Post.

 

[Buccaneer]

Louvre, seems to be a 100% match.

Differences that I see in the Civ5 version:

1. No clouds
2. Adding a very noticable beam
3. Added noticeable vegetation in front
4. Added a tree at left
5. Eliminated transparency in glass
6. Removed numerous architectural detail on the building
7. Removed window panes
8. Removed water at the base
9. Removed round opening near the main entrance
10. Changed the left slope of the pyramid slightly

100% Carbon Copy? Not even close.

 

[Bezurn]

I find it humorous that people complain about real life pictures used in a game based on reality. Sure they took some shortcuts in using numerous images on the internet, but in every case there are clear differences from the original item and the one in the game.

What is the difference between an artist painting a picture from one of these many pictures on a canvas, then scanning it into the computer, and one who uses a computer to remold an image to fit a particular style for a game? Both have done work to create the object, but the one who uses the computer has saved a great deal of time. Time on an object that has little impact on the game overall.

Sure its a shortcut to creating decent looking icons for the multitude of items in the game. But if those images had not been part of the game would I have bought it? No, I bought the game for many other reasons, but none of them had to do with the quality of the icons for objects in the game. However, if I had bought just these mocked up photos of which some are under copyright, and nothing else, then I could see concern about violating copyright laws. But as it is the vast majority of the money I spent went to paying for the programming and 3d art work.

Sorry for breaking the rules of the post and not submitting a new scavenged image.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

What is the difference between an artist painting a picture...

Manic-5 hydroelectric dam created 25 years ago for an album cover.
That's what originality truly means or meant.
I still paint (or design, btw) -- under contracted terms and conditions. And i will always respect fellow artists... even in a public forum such as CFC.

 

[DaveMcW]

Great Scientist

 

[JohnnyW]

Great Scientist

That's not really that close at all.