View Single Post
  #34  
Old 2017-07-09, 6:52am
sislonski sislonski is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 30, 2005
Posts: 6,442
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGA View Post
I think that's extremely unfair. She wasn't supporting tutorial theft at all.
Fact of the matter: shards, pleating, implosions are all old technique. Very little is new. The "look" may be. I love your arrow. I love Naos fire opals. But it's manipulating the same technique into specific styles.

I think it's sucky trying to claim fire opals in any tutorial. I tweak when somebody teaches the baleen. But creasing a bit of silver glass before encasing isn't NEW.

I do understand that the end user may buy two written tutorials because one may be a copy cat but it's easier understood. It sucks but if all techniques are already invented, who really owns it? The one who can't teach it accurately, or the successful instructor?

Calling someone a thief for enjoying one thorough tut over an unclear tut is unfair.
Well first of all I'm not claiming the use of shards as my own, never have, never will, that's a basic technique that's been used for ages. My tutorial is on how to create an arrowhead.

you're right the implosion is nothing new, nor shards, nor encasing creased silver glass. Never claimed it to be. I think the point is being missed by many. It's not about claiming ownership of a basic technique, it's about claiming ownership on the process/steps into how it's used/manipulated to create a particular look or bead design. That's what makes the difference. That's the point. Which you did mention. That IS the difference!

Copying the "process" of how that "particular style of bead design" was created is the point . There's a difference. By then copying that process of creating that particular "style/design" then adding a flower to it , taking a better picture or explaining it better doesn't make it "not copying"

But that's just me. To each his own. And if someone wants to support an artist who I (and many others) deem to be a thief,(and I'm sure others who don't), by purchasing that tutorial then that's their choice. If you don't know then don't worry about it. This thread is not about condemning anyone buying tutorials, it was started to condem an artist who copies.

I never called AVTrout a thief for enjoying one thoroughly written tutorial over an unclear one, so don't put words into my mouth.

That being said, yes it was unfair (not extremely but maybe slightly) to be harsh towards her about buying a copied tutorial. Maybe she didn't realize it's copied. But if she did then again that's her choice.

Basically purchasing a tutorial you feel or know is probably a copy is supporting one artist who is taking Money away from a fellow artist. If you can't get the concept ask the original writer.

I purchased Kerri Fuhr's dragonfly tutorial, it was well written, great photos. In my mind I can't see why another artist needed to rewrite Kerri's tutorial, it never needed to be copied or rewritten. So you wrote it a bit differently, you used maybe different colors, so it's a dragonfly and no one owns dragonflies in your mind, so that's okay? Give me an F'n break!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by sislonski; 2017-07-09 at 7:29am.