Hmm... Am I the only one?

IMO, this isn't manipulating. Manipulating photos, takes effort, time, and artistic talent. If you know how to stick a sticker on a piece of paper, you can use these stock images. That is basically what it is. They are already "perfectly" made images with beautifl textures and hair all on a transparent background.

There is no work involved other than hm... should I put it here or there? At least that is how I see it. I haven't knocked photo-manipulators at all. Some of the best artists I know (read: Sue) do amazing manipulations.

-Sabby

And Shay, I'd be 100% ok with people offering 3d people in say underwear or nude, that is fine, it means people would still need to work on the stock images to acheive some sort of art. =/ The way it stands now, they need to do nothing.

You know Shay that is a VERY good idea. I originally got into Poser / 3D art thinking I would make bases like that to use for my own photomaniping. If there's interest in something like that then I am sure people can / will offer it. And untextured and globally lighted ones could be useful for making doll bases from too I would think.

Ok here is an example... Click them to make them bigger...

Just seems, that they are not that much different from the average person looking at an image and saying oh that is pretty. Yet one takes 9 mins to do... It just really rubs me wrong.

This image took me 9 mins to make. Its a 9 layer image. Background is Didi-Mc - sparkles are spiritsighs @ DA - Girl is from the stock link above.


This image... took me roughly 15 hours of time... From start to finish.



Credits:
Aiko3 + Morphs
Willow by Adi & Vex
Petite Fluer Hair
Dixie Outfit
Daz Envoriment

IMO...

Whoever created that girl in her purple dress, should have the credits on her site for the hair, dress, body, etc. When she puts them together, they change and become her creation then, and whoever uses that should credit her.

I would say the same for the background = did the person who used it get it as one scene, and did they credit whoever created that scene? The sky, plants, water, ground...were those credited to whoever originally created them?

One thing I didn't mention before, and that is I don't believe anyone should make a profit off these manipulations. To make and use them for their own website, or enjoyment is one thing. To sell them and make a profit from something they didn't create from scratch, doesn't sit with me either. Then it becomes an entirely different issue.

But I still see nothing wrong with using free poser stock images for personal pleasure.

I just posted that on Tradewinds, the 3D club on Deviant. /sigh

Adding to this - for me this instills the idea that non3ders say about our art. That anyone can do it and that it just takes a couple flips of a switch to make. I see the advantage this provides for those who would love to make 3d art - but I hope people can see the disservice as well. Again there is nothing wrong with manipulations in the very least and using poser as bases is awesome...this just, in my eyes, devalues an already struggling art form.

I'm sorry if I am ruder than everyone else on this... but using stock isn't the same as doing a render. Its not even close. I don't agree with the blurb on tradewinds stock page and I quote:



People who use 3D stock and expect to receive gushing glowing responses from me will be sadly disappointed. I spend a shitload of time ensuring shadows/reflections/posing/etc is right for each render I do. Someone who snaps up a prerendered Aiko and smacks her on a background and adds some blur and sparkles and then posts it on dA in a 3D gallery should be ashamed of themselves. It has bugger-all to do with producing a 3D work.

That's another thing, what category does 3d stock go in? Is it 3d or is it digital art/photomanip? It's not 3d once it's used in another piece, it's considered a manipulation. Not that the Deviant categories are even accurate but the territory becomes even more blurred.

http://theangrycrayon.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8574

I think these two topics can go hand in hand. There are those out there that use poser figures as bases and then categorizes it as digital art/painting/airbrushing. I think deviantart's poor category selection has a big influence over this topic.

I posted comparison pieces. It isn't 3D and it devalues the time we spend, I'll stand by that. -- going read the other thread.

This is why I stick to my own stuff for my own enjoyment. I don't want money (I'll never be that good anyway) and don't care if I get credit for anything I make from a base as long as the base maker gets credit. I do it for fun. Period. Art or not to others, it is fun to me and that is why I do it. I also give gifts to people of things I put together. If it gives a smile, I am happy. Simple minded? Probably, but that is who I am.

You guys make alot of valid points. I don't think anyone who doesn't do 3D art knows what goes into the entire process, and I myself have been told it's not really art because I didn't make the models. DeviantArt is a great place to showcase what we all love to do, but I think it's websites like TAC and SMMO where you find people who truly understand the process and get the support.

I felt really bad for the 3d stock peoples because I feel they're contributing something to some one out there and I recently saw a manipulation using 3d stock that I never would have put the two together. But for me, I like the process of fiddling with everything to get it just how I like (or as close as my shite skill can do). Whether or not stockers (lol) hurt the 3d art community or not I don't know, I think in general there is a feeling that we're sometimes lesser artists because we didn't make the models we just play dress up. But with great talents like Roz, Eve, Sabby, Vex, ect. I think that view will change cuz there is no way in hell what you do is anything like dressing up a Barbie doll.

:shrug

Exactly, I would be surprised if anyone said the digital artists that make movies like LoTR or Star Wars come alive simply dressing up a barbie doll because someone else "made the model".

I don't browse galleries randomly any more. I look at what my friends have made and comment there, and occasionally look at friend's friends. I know what I like to look at and what I consider art. Screenshots of some teen's WoW character, while pleasing to them, isn't art to me, in the sense that I am stimulated by it. Yes it is 'art'.. blizzard art. but its also a compromise of render/machine/internet. So its like production-line art. I appreciate it for what it is. And in dA galleries I see so many screenshots and cutouts of game characters with drivel about how good it is cos its a uber warlock, it shouldn't even be there, its not art. It just isn't.

Similarly, I don't see how stock is "art". Its the components of art. Its like if I posted a picture of my tablet, or my pencils or my sketchbook paper... I use them all when I make a digital picture. They are the tools. Stock is a tool. I don't claim to have created my paper, indeed if I actually made my own paper, I would probably toot my horn about that fact. I don't see how stock is any different to that. If I download a bunch of stock images and drag them about a digital page to make a visually appealing collage then yay, but the stock I used isn't exactly "art" of its own accord. So why is it at dA at all?

I think deviantart sees stock as potential art...although some DD choices I've seen blow my mind. Sometimes I can't see the forest for the trees I guess.

Stock isn't art. Not in the "Fine Art" since of the word. Stock art is something generic which the person who created it is willing to sell or give away for use by others over and over again. What someone else does with it might be called art if it is of quality and used in the right way.

http://tradewinds3d.deviantart.com/journal/poll/210484/

Sangre posted a poll on tradewinds. Post your views there if you're a member.

I agree but we all know art is subjective and to each his own. I would never base the value of what I or anyone else does on what some people on dA think...and I think that goes for everyone else around here.:boggle

http://rozbeans.deviantart.com/journal/12090935/

My journal regarding the situation over at TradeWinds. They decided to take the 3D stock off and start a new club as suggested, however the poll was deleted.

glad to see they did that. I'd voted for them to do so, since it seems like a different type of gallery completely you know?

I think i would be shocked and pissed on behalf of the people who i know and have come to care about If I were to see a "stock" stamp featuring Avre.. Willow or Rosalind.. knowing how much time and work those people put into making those characters.. and other who put the same into creating the clothes and hair and other things..How different is it than for instance.. putting some slight morphs or changes to a ready made character and selling or giving away as your own?

There are tons of really nice free 3d characters clothes and props .. I know because I started out using only freebies, and probably most of my current library is still freebies..so the excuse that its too expensive for everyone and this is the only means kinda falls flat fo me. And I had Daz in my computer for nearly a year before getitng up the nerve to actually try it. Its not easy.. but neither was using photoshop or psp when I first started doing manips.. its something that needs to be learned and with a little artistic talent some great things can be done.

I voted as well on the tw poll.