Oh no!! That's so sad to hear! Glad this thread caught your eye before we lost you! Hope we can get your account straight quickly, your submissions speak for themselves! It'd be awful if we lost you!
a contact form and a page listing the admins would be a great!
I think RedShrike is mistaken, the works on OGA are most definitely distributed under terms of the chosen licenses and not by any special agreement between an artist and OGA. Aside from glsiepen's point that no such secondary agreement is ever presented to submitters, also consider the fact that OGA accepts third party submissions where there is no chance for such an agreement between OGA and the original artist to be made.
MedicineStorm is correct, however, only the copyright holder can bring suit for a license violation. No one else has standing to do so. This is not an assumption, it's the way the law works. Think of it this way, sonething being GPL'd doesn't entitle anyone to demand source for something, it entitles the author to demand a distributor make source available. So as he says, it would be strange indeed for an author to post a work here sans 'source' and then turn around and sue someone who uses it for not including 'source', what would be the point of that?
@gsliepen: Sorry if I've come off as contentious here, I guess I can be a bit defensive on OGA's behalf at times. But I want to say, you have an important issue and one well worth discussing. And I totally get the point you are making, if this were a site full of binaries for GPL'd programs with no source code in site, that would be a scandal. I think the point the rest of us are making is that with art works it isn't nearly so clear cut and OGA has chosen to be flexible rather than rigid on the issue.
I don't know how easy the formatting is to change but you might move the featured set up so it's closer to top of the page. I had to scroll down a bit to see it. Could be as simple as displaying fewer 'best of all time' results.
The problem is you can't say what the preferred format is, only what format you'd prefer. So you can't really claim someone hasn't provided 'source' already. Anyway, it's a choice, OGA can host GPL works and let folks request something in an alternate format if they think it'd be useful for them, or OGA can remove all GPL'd works and revel in it's purity. I for one am ok with the former. I will add that I am on record saying that ALL the licenses on this site need better explaining and GPL in particular needs some serious caveats around it to discourage the sort of accidental licensing ya'll deacribe. http://opengameart.org/forumtopic/site-faqsubmission-guidelines-updatesc...
Well, I've downloaded plenty of linux distros in my time and I've never once come across a folder full of layered PSD or XCF files representing the 'source' for all the various images, wallpapers, logos, icons, etc. etc. that came with the distro. Nor have I ever seen similar for the miscellaneous sound files that come with a distro.
It's not like source code where there's a set of common well defined 'preferred formats'.
The works are provided in the format people find useful.
If you want something in another format, ask. Under GPL, source only has to be provided upon request anyways, so make tbe request.
Tuesday, July 19, 2016 - 23:11
Ok, I am going to try again as new post, just to see if that helps with the formatting...
I don't think it's useful to argue about what constitutes the 'preferred format of modification' for the various artworks on OGA.
Unless there's a golden table somewhere that specifies exactly what constitutes the 'preferred format' for every type of work, it's a moot point, you can't win the argument one way or the other.
As an example, gsliepen sites music stored as an .ogg as an non-preffered format.
As a developer, I can say that is exactly my preferred format for modifying game music. It's well compressed and it's a common file format. I can quickly and easily load it into an editor of my choice and make the modifications I'd want to make (most likely re-leveling the volume and some alight eq adjustments to make it match the rest of the game audio, plus probably slice a few bars off the front to make the song start faster). For me this is infinitely preferable to a MIDI or whatever file meant to be loaded into some music creation application I don't own or don't have installed on my PC.
So you see, you can argue the 'preferred format' from here to Eternia, unless you want to make a judge decide, there's no winning that one.
At the end of the day, you just have to take it on good faith that the artist has provided the work in the format they thought was 'preferred'.
Anyway, do we think some people are disingenuously posting works here as GPL while deliberately withholding the 'preferred format' source files?
Is OGA trying to make a mockery out of GPL by intentionally hosting works without source in 'the preferred form for modifications'?
No, of course not. Works are posted and hosted in the formats that submitters think would be most useful to others.
If you want the work in another format all you have to do is ask. You see requests like that all the time on here and artists generally oblige. And if they don't, it's typically because they literally can't, as in 'I found these .wavs on an old hard drive, they were part of an old project and unfortunately I've lost the .xyz files I used to make them'.
@bart: re: including GPL among the licenses, I don't support removing it (the original reasons for including it still seem valid to me) but I do support burying it a bit on the submission form and surrounding it with flashing neon lights that say 'don't click here unless you are absolutely sure you know what you are doing!!'
Shading on his body looks amazing!! Clint u r incredible!!!
Two thoughts on the head:
the highlight cutting right through the center of his face is a bit distracting.
Since it's a portrait his face should be the priority and the main thing that grabs your eye.
Right now, for me, the shading is what pops out and his face seems a bit either stuck on top of the grey bands or hiding underneath them. You might do well to dial back the number of bands/shades, and try to arrange them so there is a nice solid light grey piece right to the right of center for his face to sit on. If you donit right, you sbould still be able to imply the cone shape but with fewer bands.
This is also important because with the number of shades/bands you use on his face, you're setting the bar and level of detail you'll want to use elsewhere in order to keep the image consistent. There's some leeway there, but generally you want to use a similar number of steps from light to dark throughout the whole image. As an extreme example, imagine his head has 100 shades of grey from light to dark, but then his body only uses 3 shades from light to dark. They won't look like part of the same image at all.
Second, there's kind of a perspective cheat going on right now with his mouth and face in general being perfectly horizontal but the shoulders now tilted and base of head showing some perspective and rounding. You might try putting a little curve in his mouth and offsetting the eyes from one another in order to angle his face a bit to match the new angle of his head. This mismatch in perspectives may be part of the reason I am seeing the face as pasted over the shading.
@spiderdave:
Oh no!! That's so sad to hear! Glad this thread caught your eye before we lost you! Hope we can get your account straight quickly, your submissions speak for themselves! It'd be awful if we lost you!
a contact form and a page listing the admins would be a great!
Regarding your issue with using heroism, let me say well chosen! It's a most excellent track indeed! :)
Still, have you tried asking for the song in another format?
Out of curiosity, does debian specify what they want for 'source' for an ogg file?
If you're looking for a substitute, here's a recent submission with a similar feel to it:
http://opengameart.org/content/col-legno
I think RedShrike is mistaken, the works on OGA are most definitely distributed under terms of the chosen licenses and not by any special agreement between an artist and OGA. Aside from glsiepen's point that no such secondary agreement is ever presented to submitters, also consider the fact that OGA accepts third party submissions where there is no chance for such an agreement between OGA and the original artist to be made.
MedicineStorm is correct, however, only the copyright holder can bring suit for a license violation. No one else has standing to do so. This is not an assumption, it's the way the law works. Think of it this way, sonething being GPL'd doesn't entitle anyone to demand source for something, it entitles the author to demand a distributor make source available. So as he says, it would be strange indeed for an author to post a work here sans 'source' and then turn around and sue someone who uses it for not including 'source', what would be the point of that?
Let me add that I only wish I were good enough to use bart's art in my projects!
@MedicineStorm: Well put all the way around.
@gsliepen: Sorry if I've come off as contentious here, I guess I can be a bit defensive on OGA's behalf at times. But I want to say, you have an important issue and one well worth discussing. And I totally get the point you are making, if this were a site full of binaries for GPL'd programs with no source code in site, that would be a scandal. I think the point the rest of us are making is that with art works it isn't nearly so clear cut and OGA has chosen to be flexible rather than rigid on the issue.
That's pretty awesome!!
I don't know how easy the formatting is to change but you might move the featured set up so it's closer to top of the page. I had to scroll down a bit to see it. Could be as simple as displaying fewer 'best of all time' results.
The problem is you can't say what the preferred format is, only what format you'd prefer. So you can't really claim someone hasn't provided 'source' already. Anyway, it's a choice, OGA can host GPL works and let folks request something in an alternate format if they think it'd be useful for them, or OGA can remove all GPL'd works and revel in it's purity. I for one am ok with the former. I will add that I am on record saying that ALL the licenses on this site need better explaining and GPL in particular needs some serious caveats around it to discourage the sort of accidental licensing ya'll deacribe. http://opengameart.org/forumtopic/site-faqsubmission-guidelines-updatesc...
Well, I've downloaded plenty of linux distros in my time and I've never once come across a folder full of layered PSD or XCF files representing the 'source' for all the various images, wallpapers, logos, icons, etc. etc. that came with the distro. Nor have I ever seen similar for the miscellaneous sound files that come with a distro.
It's not like source code where there's a set of common well defined 'preferred formats'.
The works are provided in the format people find useful.
If you want something in another format, ask. Under GPL, source only has to be provided upon request anyways, so make tbe request.
Ok, I am going to try again as new post, just to see if that helps with the formatting...
I don't think it's useful to argue about what constitutes the 'preferred format of modification' for the various artworks on OGA.
Unless there's a golden table somewhere that specifies exactly what constitutes the 'preferred format' for every type of work, it's a moot point, you can't win the argument one way or the other.
As an example, gsliepen sites music stored as an .ogg as an non-preffered format.
As a developer, I can say that is exactly my preferred format for modifying game music. It's well compressed and it's a common file format. I can quickly and easily load it into an editor of my choice and make the modifications I'd want to make (most likely re-leveling the volume and some alight eq adjustments to make it match the rest of the game audio, plus probably slice a few bars off the front to make the song start faster). For me this is infinitely preferable to a MIDI or whatever file meant to be loaded into some music creation application I don't own or don't have installed on my PC.
So you see, you can argue the 'preferred format' from here to Eternia, unless you want to make a judge decide, there's no winning that one.
At the end of the day, you just have to take it on good faith that the artist has provided the work in the format they thought was 'preferred'.
Anyway, do we think some people are disingenuously posting works here as GPL while deliberately withholding the 'preferred format' source files?
Is OGA trying to make a mockery out of GPL by intentionally hosting works without source in 'the preferred form for modifications'?
No, of course not. Works are posted and hosted in the formats that submitters think would be most useful to others.
If you want the work in another format all you have to do is ask. You see requests like that all the time on here and artists generally oblige. And if they don't, it's typically because they literally can't, as in 'I found these .wavs on an old hard drive, they were part of an old project and unfortunately I've lost the .xyz files I used to make them'.
@bart: re: including GPL among the licenses, I don't support removing it (the original reasons for including it still seem valid to me) but I do support burying it a bit on the submission form and surrounding it with flashing neon lights that say 'don't click here unless you are absolutely sure you know what you are doing!!'
Shading on his body looks amazing!! Clint u r incredible!!!
Two thoughts on the head:
the highlight cutting right through the center of his face is a bit distracting.
Since it's a portrait his face should be the priority and the main thing that grabs your eye.
Right now, for me, the shading is what pops out and his face seems a bit either stuck on top of the grey bands or hiding underneath them. You might do well to dial back the number of bands/shades, and try to arrange them so there is a nice solid light grey piece right to the right of center for his face to sit on. If you donit right, you sbould still be able to imply the cone shape but with fewer bands.
This is also important because with the number of shades/bands you use on his face, you're setting the bar and level of detail you'll want to use elsewhere in order to keep the image consistent. There's some leeway there, but generally you want to use a similar number of steps from light to dark throughout the whole image. As an extreme example, imagine his head has 100 shades of grey from light to dark, but then his body only uses 3 shades from light to dark. They won't look like part of the same image at all.
Second, there's kind of a perspective cheat going on right now with his mouth and face in general being perfectly horizontal but the shoulders now tilted and base of head showing some perspective and rounding. You might try putting a little curve in his mouth and offsetting the eyes from one another in order to angle his face a bit to match the new angle of his head. This mismatch in perspectives may be part of the reason I am seeing the face as pasted over the shading.
Pages