Sig Battles: Discussion

[chimay12321]

I want to say my words about Nai's entry, because I think that his entry is completely fine. A sig is meant to be something personal in the first place, if he finds the MH17 disaster really important, he may make a sig about it. The sig doesn't violate forum rules, because it doesn't offense anyone.

 

If I want to make a PETA sig because I'm a die-hard veganist, why shouldn't I be allowed to do so?

[DrewDale]

Iif he finds the MH17 disaster really important, he may make a sig about it. 

 

If I was to find something really important, I would not enter a competition with my beliefs in order to score points. There is a lot of things I feel very strongly about that may or may not offend people, but I for one would not enter a competition with a design based on it.

Yes the MH17 Disaster IS terrible and important, but I would have been more impressed if Nai had made a signature remembering the 298 innocent souls who died. 

Edited July 25, 2014 by DrewDale

[Nai]

Yes the MH17 Disaster IS terrible and important, but I would have been more impressed if Nai had made a signature remembering the 298 innocent souls who died. 

 

Dear Drewdale,

 

Before going even further, FYI, I come from the same 'nest' as that fateful 'bird'. There're nothing more terrible than seeing your country flag lied on the ground and burned in flame, but not able to extinguish the fire. Only God does know.

 

Reading your last sentence, I think and dare to bet that you didn't see what I have posted in these two threads :

 

http://forums.getpaint.net/index.php?/topic/29326-sotw111-submissions-clouds/

 

http://forums.getpaint.net/index.php?/topic/29341-expressing-sympathies-and-concerns-to-those-onboard-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17/

[Nai]

I want to say my words about Nai's entry, because I think that his entry is completely fine. A sig is meant to be something personal in the first place, if he finds the MH17 disaster really important, he may make a sig about it. The sig doesn't violate forum rules, because it doesn't offense anyone.

 

If I want to make a PETA sig because I'm a die-hard veganist, why shouldn't I be allowed to do so?

 

Thanks chimay12321 ! But that doesn't stop me from withdrawing.

 

Oh yeah, I feel 20 pounds lighter after the withdrawal.

Edited July 25, 2014 by Nai

[DrewDale]

Yes I did read both threads. If I recall the clouds entry one, I gave it a Rep point, very good image

Our country has had it's flag burned during many conflicts and our service men have died in large numbers, personally I pay my respects in a different way - Fund raising for Help the heroes, attending services for fallen troops based in the middle east - and not by entering a competition with my thoughts. 

You are twisting this around as if I am someone with no feelings, I have deepest sympathy for all on board that flight, no matter what country they came from, no matter what their religion / colour / background / creed, they did not deserve to die. I am on your side 100% with that.

Edited July 25, 2014 by DrewDale

[nitenurse79]

So what happens now with this current sig battle ?  does the host remove the votes / comments so far and start back as my entry being the first entered ? Rule #9 seems to state that

[JulioCoolio]

Who knows, but I entered my sig just to hopefully keep things going.

[Ego Eram Reputo]

Reset the scores and let the battle begin!

[Cc4FuzzyHuggles]

Don't know if it qualifies, but I'll throw my Sig in the ring. If not, never mind.....

The plane probably is not usable because Paint.NET was used in just a portion of the creation. But this one is 100% PDN:

If you haven't yet, read the first post on the first page of the sig battles to know the rules.

 

And for my understanding...

Most of the signature battle is based on whichever sig people like most, but it is still a "paint.net" battle. I do not know how much of pdn was used for the plane sig, but I think if a good portion of a sig is pdn, and if you tell what parts are pdn, then any entry should be ok.

 

I personally would vote on the pdn parts since this is a pdn battle. And although I don't think you used any photos, I do want to mention that I would also vote on photos that were edited or manipulated using pdn, since photo editing and photo manipulation takes a talent of it's own. But, what sparks my votes is very different from what sparks other peoples votes. Some people are strict and only like 100% pdn. Some people are visual and don't care how the sig was made, if it looks good, then it looks good, simple as that. Others are all about effort, if they can see effort was put into the sig, then that's what impresses them.

 

For any paint.net competition though, it's up to you on what you enter. I normally don't enter for the sake of votes, I enter anything because it's fun just to enter and play.

Edited March 14, 2015 by Cc4FuzzyHuggles

[Beta0]

O____o And I thought I was going to lose...

[skullbonz]

I really liked his plane entry. Perhaps if racerx didn't animate it the rule police would have been silent. One can only hope and dream. 

[MJW]

My question would be the same one Cc4FuzzyHuggles asked: How much of racerx's plane and cloud scene was produced using PDN? If it was most of it, then that was a very impressive use of PDN, and the entry should be included. If PDN was, say, only used to combine frames produced with a 3D rendering program, then the sig may still be impressive, but it's only a trivial use of PDN.

[racerx]

Paint.net was only used to make the Prop + motion blur and my logo just under the window. The plane itself is model 3-D made about 8 years ago. The clouds were animation stock which I reversed. The actual animating of all pieces was done in Aviutl (free FX editor). That's why I wouldn't include it. It doesn't matter anyway, I'm not tying to win, only supporting it.

[Cc4FuzzyHuggles]

Wow, cool. It sounds like you used a verity of programs and resources to make your plane picture, and it turned out really nice. Good job.
 
And yeah, as I said before, I don't enter to win either, I enter because it's just fun to participate. I look forward to you still entering competitions and joining the fun. I like your art, so I hope to see more of it in future comps.

[skullbonz]

 

 

If PDN was, say, only used to combine frames produced with a 3D rendering program, then the sig may still be impressive, but it's only a trivial use of PDN.

 

Many entries are made from images made with other programs or by other artists and only combined using paint.net and are ok to enter. CC's entry in the alphabet comp was a perfect example of this and she won a second place with it.   So why not his?    

 

Perhaps if he posted the links like others do it would be alright?  I'm confused here.  

Edited March 30, 2015 by skullbonz

[MJW]

I can't say what has or hasn't been allowed in sig contests, but I'm of the opinion that most of the work that makes an entry notable should be done with PDN. Otherwise, what's the point? If I generate a really spiffy image using a ray-tracer, then use PDN to crop the image and perhaps adjust the contrast, do you really think that belongs in a PDN sig contest? I'd say that unless it's clear that an important element of a sig came from an outside source, the contestant should disclose where it came from. For example, I use the famous "Chat Noir" poster by Théophile Steinlen as my avatar. I see no problem incorporating a PDN-modified version of that image in a sig for a sig contest; but I don't think it would be proper to submit a signature that was just a slightly modified version of the poster, or on the other hand, use RenderMan to generate a 3D version, then resize the the image with PDN.

 

I don't see any real comparison between Cc4FuzzyHuggles's alphabet entry and racerx's airplane. The creative aspect of cc's entry was the way the elements were combined, which I assume was done with PDN. The creative aspects of racerx's entry were the production of 3D airplane geometry, its rendering, and the cloud animation -- none of which were done in PDN. It's a very well-done signature, but it has little to do with PDN.

Edited March 31, 2015 by MJW

[skullbonz]

So then what you are saying is that it is good for some but not for others basically. In all the competitions it says that they shall be made using just paint.net but then someone added that outside image editors and images may be used as long as links are posted. Is this a selective rule? 

 

As far as I see it, all should be made using just paint.net from scratch to be fair for all. Photographs that a person took themselves could fit into this because the artist took the picture with their camera and edited it in paint.net but even that is a questionable use. 

 

I am sure that others feel the way I do but I am the only one willing to speak up and put my head on the chopping block. 

[Ego Eram Reputo]

I'm with you on this Skully. The use of external tools should be severely limited or forbidden IMHO.

Surely the purpose of the competition is to show off your talents using our favorite image editor?

[MJW]

I misunderstood your original point, skullbonz. I thought you were saying racerx's airplane sig should have been allowed, when you were actually saying cc's alphabet entry shouldn't have been. I more agree than disagree, I would say no non-PDN computer-generated elements should be allowed, but I still think that something like my cat poster avatar, especially if heavily modified with PDN, should be allowed as part of the sig.

[midora]

You shoudn't be too strict: F1: Paint.NET is a free image and photo manipulation application.

[Cc4FuzzyHuggles]

I might not be able to give you a short answer or an easy to understand answer, but here are my thoughts. (this is just how I see things)
 

Many entries are made from images made with other programs or by other artists and only combined using paint.net and are ok to enter. CC's entry in the alphabet comp was a perfect example of this and she won a second place with it.   So why not his?    

 
Here is a short-ish answer.
When it comes to paint.net competitions, I think paint.net should be the primary program that is used.
Other programs might or might not be ok, if they are ok, paint.net should still be the main program. For paint.net competitions it is good to show what paint.net can do, what can be made using paint.net, and what paint.net can do to edit images. When photos are used, it's not about the photos, it's about what people do with the photos using paint.net. Personally, I might use lots of pieces, parts, and photos, but I don't use any other program to make my signatures. 
 

As far as I see it, all should be made using just paint.net from scratch to be fair for all. Photographs that a person took themselves could fit into this because the artist took the picture with their camera and edited it in paint.net but even that is a questionable use.

 
For a longer answer....
When considering if something counts as being a paint.net picture, it is important to know the role paint.net played in making the image, but it is also good to remember that there is the idea of making things from scratch, and there is the concept of image editing. Image editing, photo manipulating, and photoshopping could be called photo art, and photo art is often a different kind of art, as it's based off of photos, and not making things from scratch. My paint.net pictures often involve photos, as I enjoy image editing, but that doesn't mean my pictures aren't paint.net, paint.net is still the program I use for the image editing.
 
Image editing is a popular hobby for some people and a real career for others. Image editing is normally done with professional programs like Photoshop, which is where the term photoshopping comes from. When people think of photoshop pictures, they don't always think of things made from scratch, but rather, they think of photos that have been digitally changed or edited in photoshop. If you explore photoshop tutorials, there are lots of tutorials that simply give you links to the resources used in the tutorial, such as stock images and photoshop brushes, and then they give you the steps of how to put all the resources together to make a cool picture using photoshop (I don't give steps to how I make my paint.net pictures, but I try to give links to the resources that I use). Photoshop can do almost any kind of digital art you can think of, but lets remember that photoshop is called PHOTOshop, as it originated as a digital photo workshop. It is a photo editing software. But what is my point, why am I talking about Photoshop? I'm talking about photoshop as a usage comparison. Paint.net might have originated from the idea of Microsoft's basic paint program (often called MS Paint), but these days paint.net is considered a “free image and photo editing software" (you can read about paint.net here). If images that are edited in photoshop by professionals can be called photoshop pictures, then I think images that are edited with paint.net are safe to be called paint.net pictures.

 

Because image editing is mostly a type of photo art, it often means requiring photo resources, and that's where people use stock photos and/or any photos from the internet. If things such as stock photos are used in paint.net comp entries, the rules say not to violate copyright laws (this is because when you use photos that are not legally free, you are stealing other people's work). So when I use photos, I try to find legally free images and then obey the licensing terms. Image licenses often want attribution and proper credit given to the original image and/or author by linking to the image. Not all licenses require attribution, but I still like to give links out of courtesy, so people know the original images that I use. (for free legal images I like this website http://www.freeimages.com/  and this one http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.) When photos are used, it's not about the photos, it's about what people do with the photos using paint.net.

 
Again, PHOTOshop, is a digital photo workshop, it is an image and photo editing program, like-wise, paint.net is also an image and photo editing program. Paint.net has it's "Adjustments" tab, which I think is mostly for photo editing, and under the "Effects" tab, there is the sub category called "Photo". And have you seen the paint.net documentation? How many of the sample images are "photos" and not images made from scratch? Paint.net is an image editing program, so I think using paint.net to edit images and photos for competitions is fair, since that's half of the programs purpose. And I am very glad paint.net is an image editor, because as a paint program or drawing program, paint.net lacks some important tools, such as built-in custom brushes, a smudge tool, air brushing, etc. Without plugins, paint.net is a very limited painting program.
 
Not everyone enjoys making things from scratch. I don't think it would be fair to say only if you make things from scratch you can enter a paint.net comp, and then exclude those who enjoy image editing. Paint.net is both a painting program and an image editing program, if the program it's self accepts both kinds of art, I don't see why it's competitions should be for or against either type of art. And luckily, according to the rules, the comps do allow both kinds of art. And I personally love the variety. I love to see how people get creative both with photos and making things from scratch.

 

(PS: I have seen images that you have "editied" using paint.net, and I like them. I hope you keep up the good work.)

 

Edit, sorry, I just wanted to say one last thing.

Using multiple programs to make a picture, versus using paint.net as an image editor, are sometimes two different things. I personally use paint.net as an image editor, I do not use other outside programs for comp entries.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Cc4FuzzyHuggles

[skullbonz]

First I am sorry that I am not a book writer and can't sidestep around the subject but here goes. 

 

If we had an image editing comp then that would be part of the theme, but they are not one.  In the logo comp for example the theme has been deviated from by so much that it has become an image editing comp and not a logo comp anymore. Look up examples of logos and google the definition, you will see I am right in this observation. So is it an image editing comp or a logo comp?

 

I can kind of see using popular game characters or scenes in a sig comp if we were doing sigs for the forums of those games. Are we making sigs for other forums or based on paint.net creation skills?

 

Paint.net is a fine image editor and for many it is easy to learn that aspect of the program long before they can grasp the creation aspect of it. But again these are not labeled as image editing comps.   

 

I can remember many artists who used to frequent these forums and create all kinds of images with no outside help. Some like welshblue, yellowman,etc.  would also write a tute on how they made their creations after the comps were over. By doing this they taught people how to create from scratch which also helped them to learn how to use the program so they could make their own creations. Are there any of these people still left in here? Have we turned into a facebook meme image editing forum? 

 

My whole understanding of the idea of comps was to promote creation, not blending of someone else's work or outside editing programs. 

Edited April 1, 2015 by skullbonz

[MJW]

I think you're mistaken if you believe that image creation is the only proper part of competitions, and that image editing isn't. I couldn't find the rules for the open-to-all sig competitions, but I did find the rules for the one-on-one sig battles, and I expect they would be similar. In April 2010, competition host chrisco97 specified that:

 

1. The signature must be created/edited in Paint.NET.
2. The signature size cannot be more than 500x200 pixels. (or 200x500 for a vertical signature)
3. If demanded, the sig-maker must link to the render(s) or stock(s) used. (C4D's not included)
s 3a. You must say what parts of your sig are stocks / renders and what parts are 100% PdN.

* * *

 

That certainly allows for editing already-existing images. (It also allows for outside renderers -- something I'm not too fond of. The point of the disclosure requirement is obviously to allow those judging the image to decide whether the creative content of the entry is sufficiently related to PDN.)

Edited April 1, 2015 by MJW

[skullbonz]

It really is up to who ever is running each comp and I never said it was a prohibited use. This discussion came up a long time ago and was decided that those parts would be added to the rules because a person can be crafty at blending outside content with paint.net. which is a talent just the same as creativity from scratch is a talent. It was mostly done to satisfy the new "talent" that spoke louder than the old talent who created, not copied and pasted. I strongly believe that is why many have left and not returned. 

 

Does it make you feel good knowing that you blended someone else's work instead of creating your own? Is it fair to someone who spent hours or days creating an entry to only be beat by someone who blended outside works done by others? I know that in this hustle and bustle world we live in that people are looking for the easy way out in everything and want one step image creation techniques rather than creating on their own but does it really teach you anything?  Something to think about is that the images people use off the internet or created in another program were created from scratch by that person to begin with. All you are doing when using these is showing people you can blend those images in paint.net which is fine and dandy but is it a right thing to do without also giving that artist his due recognition also? 

 

When I first started in paint.net the rules were simple, no outside images or programs were to be used except in places like the Photo manipulation sections or sections devoted to that kind of work. Now it is common practice to google images and use them in your own work anywhere. Just because you posted links to that work does not make it your work. If you really want to create something of your own try creating it on your own is all I am saying. We used to take pride in creating something that no one else has, creating something better than someone else has, or creating a copy of what someone else has.  Are we losing site of creativity?  Or has the definition of creativity changed? 

 

Not to beat on CC but her example in the alphabet comp is a perfect example of what I am saying. If you look it up in the archive you will see that she was the only one in that comp who used outside images to make her entry. She used six outside images and only one was from paint.net, the pencil. and if you look close I highly doubt she made the pencil using that tute but instead copy and pasted the pencil the author made. Sure she blended them all very well but what percentage was actually done in paint.net? She won a second place with it, was that fair? If you look at Drew Dale's entries in every comp he enters, his work is always done from scratch in paint.net, yet he does not get the recognition he deserves for doing so or very seldom gets enough votes to win a comp. Is that the right thing to do? Or is giving someone who uses a slew of outside works your votes the right thing to do? 

Edited April 1, 2015 by skullbonz

[skullbonz]

To get back to the subject of all of this, racerx's entry in the sig battle comp. If you are going to allow outside images or programs to be used, you can not pick or choose who can use them, you have to allow all or none the way I see it.