Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Yessir! A++

rglee129 wrote:Yessir! A++

THANKS!

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Nice design - love the colors. Can you post some larger detail shots so I can get a look at your shading? Just hoping to improve on myself, and your technique looks like it might be neat to see up close.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Wow! Not much more to say than this is awesome and you gmv. Best of luck.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Definitely gets my vote.
Brilliant use of colors; any chance we'll get to see a high res version?

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Soooo much improved from the last version! Looks fantastic.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Very nice... very nice indeed.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

this is pretty neat.

voted.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Impressive illustration man.

This has my vote.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Excellent new take on the old dragon design. Voted.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Do you have a bigger photo of the design

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Incredible, especially considering you did this with a limited color palette. Loving the dragons, this one is the best.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

A detail image would be very helpful in judging how the shirt would be.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Very cool, excellent use of colored lighting. GMV

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

imo this would be infinitely better without the tattoo gun but i understand why you put it there.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

great use of light and shade!

Absolutely Awesome!!

Got my vote

capedcrusader514 wrote:imo this would be infinitely better without the tattoo gun but i understand why you put it there.

Agreed, but I'm still voting for it. Much better than a just about anything else in the derby.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

That is an AMAZING use of color! Wonderful execution on this piece.

Re: The Ancient Art

re: weapon of mass disruption

Beautiful design. And is that a ... tattoo gun at the bottom? Awesomeness from terrific Wisconsin.

And shame on your guys for trying to get a high res pix to steal. Bad Wooters. Bad. *shakes finger at bad Wooters*

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

good stuff.

Irishcreme57 wrote:Beautiful design. And is that a ... tattoo gun at the bottom? Awesomeness from terrific Wisconsin.

And shame on your guys for trying to get a high res pix to steal. Bad Wooters. Bad. *shakes finger at bad Wooters*

Umm, well now. I'm pretty sure we all were trying to get a larger detail picture to make sure it would print properly, as there are a lot of rules surrounding whether a shirt will screen print well, or if the design can even be pulled off.

re: weapon of mass disruption

I really like the design, but I have way too many asphalt shirts. You would definitely have my vote if it wasn't on asphalt.

Funny thing is, I don't think it would look right on anything but asphalt, I'm torn :/

If remy manages to squeeze some crappy thing into the fog, I will vote for this just to help remy get out of the fog. But unless that happens, I will not be voting this week.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

I love this shirt. Simple as that.

re: weapon of mass disruption

Love the dragon! How long did it take you to draw it?

Absolutely fantastic job. Best in the derby. Now the waiting game; I'm buyin' this the moment it's up

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

With all of the half tones, this looks like a ramyb design. Tikiti are you really ramyb?

Majestic! will buy.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Have you been to see the Nine Dragons Wall? It's glorious. There's an awesome replica in Chicago Chinatown.

I only ask because your dragon reminds me of the ninth one:

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Like Binkdrop's Red Giant last week, if this doesn't print I am going to pitch a fit. If it prints, in for 2. Good luck!

Very nice. I can see multiple copies of this being delivered to my home.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Looks a bit like an image on this site.

haishasan wrote:Looks a bit like an image on this site.

That's because it's the same dragon. Is this part of a vector package?

mitchellp wrote:That's because it's the same dragon. Is this part of a vector package?

I liked this design; it has some neat colors which work nicely on a shirt. However, after seeing that this design is exactly the same as that other image, minus the dragon's back leg, I really hope this gets rejected.

Art theft is beyond stupid.

And if this is, by chance from a vector brush pack, then THAT is even more stupid.

haishasan wrote:Looks a bit like an image on this site.

Your link triggered my antivirus...

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Yeah. I don't get mad too often and express it on forums, but I feel like bellowing forth a righteous string of curse words about this image now. Using a Photoshop brush as the bulk of your image, and merely changing the colors does NOT and should NOT by any means earn you a thousand dollars. It should earn you a kick in the nads and a broken face.

Check out my awesome photoshop skills. I just clicked the mouse once and I made this amazing dragon. Nevermind I used a brush I found on Deviant Art at THIS LINK.

Click the image for a larger view and a side by side comparison of the shirt and the Photoshop brush.

Edit: Thank you haishasan for providing me the incentive I needed to go on a feverish manhunt to expose the dirty secret of the dragon photoshop brush.

binkdrop wrote:Yeah. I don't get mad too often and express it on forums, but I feel like bellowing forth a righteous string of curse words about this image now. Using a Photoshop brush as the bulk of your image, and merely changing the colors does NOT and should NOT by any means earn you a thousand dollars. It should earn you a kick in the nads and a broken face.

Check out my awesome photoshop skills. I just clicked the mouse once and I made this amazing dragon. Nevermind I used a brush I found on Deviant Art at THIS LINK.

Click the image for a larger view and a side by side comparison of the shirt and the Photoshop brush.

The title that you gave the image alone speaks volumes, Bink ;)

I'm with you... Rejection time.

binkdrop wrote:Yeah. I don't get mad too often and express it on forums, but I feel like bellowing forth a righteous string of curse words about this image now. Using a Photoshop brush as the bulk of your image, and merely changing the colors does NOT and should NOT by any means earn you a thousand dollars. It should earn you a kick in the nads and a broken face.

Check out my awesome photoshop skills. I just clicked the mouse once and I made this amazing dragon. Nevermind I used a brush I found on Deviant Art at THIS LINK.

Click the image for a larger view and a side by side comparison of the shirt and the Photoshop brush.

That is totally freaking stupid, what kind of contest is this? Had I known I didn't need any real skills I might have made a few stamp entries.

I don't think it is right to support something as superficial as this. I want to support artists that actually MADE their designs. This should be rejected immediately.

binkdrop wrote:Yeah. I don't get mad too often and express it on forums, but I feel like bellowing forth a righteous string of curse words about this image now. Using a Photoshop brush as the bulk of your image, and merely changing the colors does NOT and should NOT by any means earn you a thousand dollars. It should earn you a kick in the nads and a broken face.

Check out my awesome photoshop skills. I just clicked the mouse once and I made this amazing dragon. Nevermind I used a brush I found on Deviant Art at THIS LINK.

Click the image for a larger view and a side by side comparison of the shirt and the Photoshop brush.

How did you do that? If I only click the mouse once I just get a small circle, or at best a smattering of star shapes. Are you using something other than the brush tool? WHAT IS THIS MADNESS?!

eHalcyon wrote:How did you do that? If I only click the mouse once I just get a small circle, or at best a smattering of star shapes. Are you using something other than the brush tool? WHAT IS THIS MADNESS?!

Please tell me you're kidding.... PLEASE!?!?

JadenKale wrote:Please tell me you're kidding.... PLEASE!?!?

Of course I'm kidding JK! You make me smile.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

-1 DGMV I don't support cheaters. I'd rather vote for the stupid kiwi

haishasan wrote:Looks a bit like an image on this site.

Nice detective work. Cheaters S.U.C.K.

eHalcyon wrote:Of course I'm kidding JK! You make me smile.

I'm glad for that!

Just so long as the smile's not painted on with a pre-made photoshop brush

binkdrop wrote:busted

If this wasn't enough reason for a rejection, the design seems to be on an off color shade of asphalt as well.

I should know, woot rejected me for off color asphalts. I'm just saying.

mitchellp wrote:-1 DGMV I don't support cheaters. I'd rather vote for the stupid kiwi

All right! Woo Hoo!
Here's a link so that you can easily vote for the danged kiwi*!



*this is where eHalcyon would RickRoll you, but not me!

About the dragon, i got it from vector source book. The book is published by hbapress with cohan stock




The vectors in the book are royalty free images. It was mentioned that it is a common image, which can be used by everyone, include for commercial purpose.

tikiti wrote:About the dragon, i got it from vector source book. The book is published by hbapress with cohan stock




The vectors in the book are royalty free images. It was mentioned that it is a common image, which can be used by everyone.

I'm sure you can read that Chinese to translate that too. Keep telling yourself that.

tikiti wrote:About the dragon, i got it from vector source book. The book is published by hbapress with cohan stock




The vectors in the book are royalty free images. It was mentioned that it is a common image, which can be used by everyone.

The man has defended his design. Repsonses?

cs85b wrote:I'm sure you can read that Chinese to translate that too. Keep telling yourself that.

Yes, I can read chinese, thus the explanation.

tikiti wrote:Yes, I can read chinese, thus the explanation.

Oops. I talk too much.

tikiti wrote:Yes, I can read chinese, thus the explanation.

Just never saw a book that said "You can copy our work for no reason, even for non-educational purpose." Then again it is China, where you can buy iPhone and Nintendo clones...

I don't know quite how everyone else feels about this but royalty free or not I want to see something someone created not something borrowed and painted. Rejected or not I can not support the artist or the shirt. I have witnessed someone work for hours from announcement of a topic on Thursday until first submission Friday and I feel like this is almost like a cheap "Made In China" alternative.

Keep your brush I will be holding on to my vote.

cs85b wrote:Just never saw a book that said "You can copy our work for no reason, even for non-educational purpose."

but that's what you get for buying vector stock. Or else what the purpose of buying vector stock?

pumbaa57 wrote:The man has defended his design. Repsonses?

Tikiti if what you've said is true, then I must be the first to respectfully recant my accusations of you using material that wasn't available for commercial purposes. I can not read any Chinese dialect, but I will take what you've said as truth and leave it at that.

I would like to assure you I wasn't out to get you; I don't know you and I definitely have no personal vendetta against you. I simply found a Photoshop brush which closely resembled the design, and one which had a Creative commons license with clauses for no derivative works and non-commercial use.

I don't think that using some other artist's image as the bulk of your design is worthy of $1000 though, when there are so many other artists who strive to create pieces completely from scratch and using their own ideas. That is only my personal opinion though. However, as I mentioned before, if your source book states that they are royalty free images available for commercial use, then I have no legal right to accuse you of art "theft", so I apologize for the false accusations.

I do hope in future derbies we see work from you that is 100 percent your own creativity, devoid of vector stock images. I'm sure it's okay to say that all of us here only want the best for everyone's art and t-shirt designing skills and capabilities. After all, one can not grow as an artist if they are constantly incorporating other artists' work into their designs.

tikiti wrote:but that's what you get for buying vector stock. Or else what the purpose of buying vector stock?

Not to post your copied and slightly modified work in an art contest. I can tell you that much; so can the other 95% of other submitters of the Derby that don't cheat.

At least everyone knows the truth now. This image was created from an image the "artist" bought off the internet, slightly modified and then submitted as an "original" design. Good work!

tikiti wrote:About the dragon, i got it from vector source book. The book is published by hbapress with cohan stock




The vectors in the book are royalty free images. It was mentioned that it is a common image, which can be used by everyone, include for commercial purpose.

Royalty free or not, this is cheap and unethical. The use of vector packs or brushes undermines the work artists do as a whole. I cannot express how angry this makes me, that some of us actually worked on our own designs for hours, and here you are tweaking colors on someone else's work, and winning. If you and your design really were so squeaky clean and free from any litigation, why didn't you reference the vector packs in the first place?

If this doesn't get rejected I'll be very upset.

binkdrop wrote:Tikiti if what you've said is true, then I must be the first to respectfully recant my accusations of you using material that wasn't available for commercial purposes. I can not read any Chinese dialect, but I will take what you've said as truth and leave it at that.

I would like to assure you I wasn't out to get you; I don't know you and I definitely have no personal vendetta against you. I simply found a Photoshop brush which closely resembled the design, and one which had a Creative commons license with clauses for no derivative works and non-commercial use.

I don't think that using some other artist's image as the bulk of your design is worthy of $1000 though, when there are so many other artists who strive to create pieces completely from scratch and using their own ideas. That is only my personal opinion though. However, as I mentioned before, if your source book states that they are royalty free images available for commercial use, then I have no legal right to accuse you of art "theft", so I apologize for the false accusations.

I do hope in future derbies we see work from you that is 100 percent your own creativity, devoid of vector stock images. I'm sure it's okay to say that all of us here only want the best for everyone's art and t-shirt designing skills and capabilities. After all, one can not grow as an artist if they are constantly incorporating other artists' work into their designs.

binkdrop, you are entitle to your opinion. And I respect that entirely.

I entered derbies before, I created entries that consumed hours of making. It did not get anywhere. I'm taking the easy way I guess. As much I want to say this entry is something I am proud of, it does "made" it, as compared to my other works.

tikiti wrote:binkdrop, you are entitle to your opinion. And I respect that entirely.

I entered derbies before, I created entries that consumed hours of making. It did not get anywhere. I'm taking the easy way I guess. As much I want to say this entry is something I am proud of, it does "made" it, as compared to my other works.

Judging from your join date and blank box, I suppose this is a fake account to shield you from shame and scorn?

I can respect the use of special brushes and vectors as long as
1. it's legal
2. real work has been done instead of just slapping the purchased/downloaded stuff onto a shirt template
3. the artist admits it right away without being "busted"

eHalcyon wrote:Judging from your join date and blank box, I suppose this is a fake account to shield you from shame and scorn?

I can respect the use of special brushes and vectors as long as
1. it's legal
2. real work has been done instead of just slapping the purchased/downloaded stuff onto a shirt template
3. the artist admits it right away without being "busted"

Sorry, I not reffering to woot only

gnubjub wrote:I don't know quite how everyone else feels about this but royalty free or not I want to see something someone created not something borrowed and painted. Rejected or not I can not support the artist or the shirt. I have witnessed someone work for hours from announcement of a topic on Thursday until first submission Friday and I feel like this is almost like a cheap "Made In China" alternative.

Keep your brush I will be holding on to my vote.

I have to agree. There are illustrations here that obviously took alot of time, thought, and DESIGN to create. The artists who created those works put their own creativity to use to come up with an original, one of a kind piece of work.

To submit something that you didn't create as an original work flies in the face of the people who spent hours toiling over every detail to create a strong piece.

I thought in the derby FAQ it stated that work that was borrowed from somewhere else was a rejectable offense. If this entry stays in the contest, I'll take that as Woot saying it's OK to use clipart, as long as you paid for the stock images.

tikiti wrote:binkdrop, you are entitle to your opinion. And I respect that entirely.

I entered derbies before, I created entries that consumed hours of making. It did not get anywhere. I'm taking the easy way I guess. As much I want to say this entry is something I am proud of, it does "made" it, as compared to my other works.

I'd love to see the document whereby you gained full rights and ownership to the image.

And again with the off shade asphalt, and the general unethical behavior. I don't know where you think 'cheating' will get you in life (legal or not, this is pretty low) but something tells me woot will not see your submission in the same light as you.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Sweet vector packs! I gotta get me some of those 'cuz the vectors I use from my imagination are simply not doing the job .

homesluice wrote:I'd love to see the document whereby you gained full rights and ownership to the image.

I do not own the copyrights. No one does, because it is not under copyright material.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

So... what about the other parts of the design? Tattoo gun, fire, blue cloud thing - did you do those yourself, or is it something you have the rights to?

tikiti wrote:I do not own the copyrights. No one does, because it is not under copyright material.

That's cute, because 'royalty free' actually means both the "licensor" and "licensee" own the rights to the image; not anyone willy nilly.

See for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty-free

tikiti wrote:I do not own the copyrights. No one does, because it is not under copyright material.

Does this mean that we can copy your artwork and put it on a different color as an entirely different design? How would that make you feel? Probably exactly how all the artists complaining about you feel right now.

homesluice wrote:That's cute, because 'royalty free' actually means both the "licensor" and "licensee" own the rights to the image; not anyone willy nilly.

See for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalty-free

ok, the correct name is public domain image. Pardon me for not having english as my main language.

tikiti wrote:ok, the correct name is public domain image. Pardon me for not having english as my main language.

It doesn't have to be; all you had to do was 'translate' the document.

Really we wouldn't be having this conversation had you not been using another artist's work. Regardless of whether or not you own the work, they say in the FAQ that it's rejection worthy if another artist has made it whether or not you own it.

cs85b wrote:Does this mean that we can copy your artwork and put it on a different color as an entirely different design? How would that make you feel? Probably exactly how all the artists complaining about you feel right now.

As the whole image, it is not. However, the dragon itself is accessible to everyone.

tikiti wrote:As the whole image, it is not. However, the dragon itself is accessible to everyone.

So did you do the other parts of the design? I asked earlier but you must have missed it. Tattoo gun, fire, blue texture - your work? Also public domain?

tikiti wrote:As the whole image, it is not. However, the dragon itself is accessible to everyone.

Isn't the whole piece a derivative work? If so, then the rights may devolve to the rights for the major part of the design.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Hey everyone!!! Use the tattle button above the image if you believe the template is off or the image is stolen.

eHalcyon wrote:So did you do the other parts of the design? I asked earlier but you must have missed it. Tattoo gun, fire, blue texture - your work? Also public domain?

eHalcyon, they are not public domain. I did them. It is series of halftones lapping together.

Josephus wrote:Isn't the whole piece a derivative work? If so, then the rights may devolve to the rights for the major part of the design.

Josephus, again, it is public domain. Or else I wont be using it.

tikiti wrote:eHalcyon, they are not public domain. I did them. It is series of halftones lapping together.

The tattoo gun is a series of half tones??? Nope.... Did you draw the tattoo gun or did you get it from somewhere else?

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

While shirts that have used clip art have printed in the past, the designer here may have an obstacle to overcome in that the terms of use appear as though they are in Chinese (?) and therefore not readily accessible to the woot staff for review. Had the designer presented this earlier it may have given woot some time to weigh their options. I'll be interested to see what they do with such a short time frame to make a judgment call.

eHalcyon wrote:Judging from your join date and blank box, I suppose this is a fake account to shield you from shame and scorn?

I can respect the use of special brushes and vectors as long as
1. it's legal
2. real work has been done instead of just slapping the purchased/downloaded stuff onto a shirt template
3. the artist admits it right away without being "busted"

Tikiti, are you radiomode?

dankstick wrote:Tikiti, are you radiomode?

You're not the only one who thought this.

dankstick wrote:Tikiti, are you radiomode?

Upon seeing the comp when entered, I had thought the same thing.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Damn.

That leaps into the vacuum, was a nice design and I was going to buy a shirt for the first time. OH well.

I am so happy that this was exposed. All of my spidey senses told me that this was a downloaded image. I've been bugging my boyfriend yapping about this all week. I put in a little time trying to find the source earlier in the week, but I didn't have any luck. I've have been stopping myself from posting, because I didn't feel like being attacked by the rabid fans of this design. I too wondered if Tikiti was Radiomode. Radiomode has pulled this very trick at least three times that I can count, but I'm sure that he isn't the only person in these competitions doing this type of thing. The worst part is these users have had their stock image collages printed before! I can't stand the thought of people get paid for stealing other people's work, even if it is "royalty free". This competition is supposed to be for original designs and in my mind that means you create the images yourself. I know Woot doesn't always fall on my side of the line with this issue....but THANK YOU WOOT FOR REJECTING THIS! Several of us users have tried to get these stock vector hack jobs rejected in the past and have been largely unsuccessful. I consider this a huge victory. I feel like dancing! YES!

Keep your eyes out for "someoneabcde" who I suspect might be the same person. From the Pressure derby...

Don't really care, because I didn't like the design, but I didn't like the Kiwi even more. Woot's 3rd now? ... Lousy kiwi... grumble...

JustJiggles wrote:Don't really care, because I didn't like the design, but I didn't like the Kiwi even more. Woot's 3rd now? ... Lousy kiwi... grumble...

...Still grumbling... Can Woot print the greatest shirt ever made, Artulo's "Gonna Make You Lunch" instead? I would have that tattooed on me...

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Hmmm, so...

...we can't verify the rights of the source image

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Very disappointing. I thought we had a newcomer with mad chops, not someone who's subbed before using a fake name and canned images.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

Glad to see woot rejecting this because of the stock vectors (even if just because they couldn't authenticate). I never really saw the appeal of this one anyway, it's rise to the fog confused me a lot more than most. Hopefully woot will come down on stock vectors completely but I doubt it given how many they've already printed from the derbies.

Re: Weapon of mass disruption

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I loved this shirt

So I don't like this shirt, and I agree that pending more detailed info, such as chinese translation, it's questionable.

However, I don't get some of the responses here.

Human beings have been around for quite a while now, and even with current excessive terms copyright only lasts for a fraction of that time. At the same time artist continually recycle previous motifs and use pre-created tools.

Tell me that all your photoshop brushes, all your fonts, all your color palettes and pantone codes were created from scratch by you... wait, you can't? You have brush packs and match pantone codes and buy your fonts?
Our Movie Genre, you must be a big thief. All real artists do everything from scratch.

That skull and crossbones? You dare rip off of 19th century pirates? That raven? You dare rip off Edgar Allan Poe? Microchips? I'm sorry, engineers have patents on those.

Our Movie Genre you dare rip off a pretty traditional looking oriental dragon that in some similar form has probably been around for a few thousand years regardless of whether that exact design is someone else's?

The only reason people like the dragon is because it looks like other oriental dragons, not because it's unique or original. All you 'artists,' wake up and realize that imitating well known visual motifs isn't any different than incorporating other design elements except that it takes less time and get a life.

Anyhow, it's not like I like collage artists, shirt leaps into the vacuum and the 'creator' was lazy but you don't need to have a hernia about it.

PS: If you want to avoid this scaffolding you could just have everything be done by hand, that's 'transformative' enough to avoid this sort of scaffolding and also skips the whole ease of 'stock' bits.

slogger wrote:The only reason people like the dragon is because it looks like other oriental dragons, not because it's unique or original. All you 'artists,' wake up and realize that imitating well known visual motifs isn't any different than incorporating other design elements except that it takes less time and get a life.

No, that's incorrect. Look again at what has been posted - the problem artists have with this design is that no work was done with it. It was literally one click of the brush to get all the linework of the dragon. Using a circular brush shape to draw is not even close to the same thing. There is a difference between using a basic brush shape in Photoshop and downloading a complete dragon image and calling it your own.

spanishmel wrote:I am so happy that this was exposed. All of my spidey senses told me that this was a downloaded image. I've been bugging my boyfriend yapping about this all week. ...

So you're dancing around because Woot couldn't verify the status of the copyright, and due to an honest mistake Tikiti is out $1000 bucks and the people can't get the dragon tshirt they wanted.

Also, ppl complaining that not much work was put into this - noone cares. According to wooters it looked better then 95% of the other entries, and that's the whole point of this site.

camoor wrote:So you're dancing around because Woot couldn't verify the status of the copyright, and due to an honest mistake Tikiti is out $1000 bucks and the people can't get the dragon tshirt they wanted. I can't imagine why your bf finds you annoying.

Also, ppl complaining that not much work was put into this - noone cares. According to wooters it looked better then 95% of the other entries, and that's the whole point of this site.

When woot rejects designs they pretty much always use the most convenient excuse, I mean reason. If they can say something that is less limiting to them in the future, like "we can't verify the terms because it is written in Australian English instead of American English" rather than "we really, really don't like people to use essentially unaltered art created by someone else", then they'll always go with the reason that allows them the most wiggle room on rejection of future designs.

What a let down... looked really cool, I had been waiting until Friday for this shirt, but yeah, I guess looking cool isn't all that matters.

camoor wrote:So you're dancing around because Woot couldn't verify the status of the copyright, and due to an honest mistake Tikiti is out $1000 bucks and the people can't get the dragon tshirt they wanted. I can't imagine why your bf finds you annoying.

Also, ppl complaining that not much work was put into this - noone cares. According to wooters it looked better then 95% of the other entries, and that's the whole point of this site.

Honest mistake? He tried to hide it. If he really didn't feel like it as a big deal he could have posted it; obviously he felt it would be potentially ratted out so he kept his mouth shut. "Honest" mistake. Hah, he just 'hid' the truth of the design until someone inconveniently showed it.

Regardless, it's disrespectful to every artist that put time into a work here. I realize you don't appreciate that, but you know, most people typically don't respect the hard work that goes into art.

You say no one cares but guess what? Obviously a lot of people care. The only people who don't seem to care is.... well, people who don't have ethical qualms with taking someone's art, altering color elements and claiming it as their own until someone finds the source image elsewhere.

Something tells me you're not an artist *shock*.

homesluice wrote:Honest mistake? He tried to hide it. If he really didn't feel like it as a big deal he could have posted it; obviously he felt it would be potentially ratted out so he kept his mouth shut. "Honest" mistake. Hah, he just 'hid' the truth of the design until someone inconveniently showed it.

Regardless, it's disrespectful to every artist that put time into a work here. I realize you don't appreciate that, but you know, most people typically don't respect the hard work that goes into art.

You say no one cares but guess what? Obviously a lot of people care. The only people who don't seem to care is.... well, people who don't have ethical qualms with taking someone's art, altering color elements and claiming it as their own until someone finds the source image elsewhere.

Something tells me you're not an artist *shock*.

Something tells me you're not a fan of Warhol. Art can be a collaborative effort, with one artist building off the works of the last. And there are generous souls who release images to public domain. We're the ones who lost the chance to buy an awesome shirt, so get over yourself man.

camoor wrote:So you're dancing around because Woot couldn't verify the status of the copyright, and due to an honest mistake Tikiti is out $1000 bucks and the people can't get the dragon tshirt they wanted. I can't imagine why your bf finds you annoying.

Also, ppl complaining that not much work was put into this - noone cares. According to wooters it looked better then 95% of the other entries, and that's the whole point of this site.

Camoor, if you think Tikiti made a "honest mistake" I have a bridge to sell you. Although, I am a villainous witch who seeks to sabotage honest hard working super artists like Tikiti, I can say with certitude that if my boyfriend is annoyed by me, it has more to do with my talking too much while he's playing a video game than it does with Tikiti's harrowing tale of thwarted ambition, plight and despair. Tikiti isn't "out" $1000...Woot isn't going to penalize him or debit his bank account. He simply did not win and is not going to be rewarded the $1000 prize. Would you rather your shining Adonis be slapped with an infringement lawsuit? I know it is a harsh reality but the people who won will be paid the money...from my understanding the people who didn't win don't get paid. Woot finally took out some of the garbage! I'm sure you'll forgive me but I think I feel some dancing coming on. This one is for you Camoor!

camoor wrote:Something tells me you're not a fan of Warhol. Art can be a collaborative effort, with one artist building off the works of the last. And there are generous souls who release images to public domain. We're the ones who lost the chance to buy an awesome shirt, so get over yourself man.

indeed i am not a fan of HACKS. pretentious hacks at that. his sorry copy and paste jobs got passed off as fine art and he even had othr people paint his paintings. how does that make him a painter? that makes him a designer. and moreso, a designer appreciated largely by pretentious insecure people with superiority complexes who talk down to people and ridicule them for having opinions and ethics. yeah, im talking about you, camoor

marmls2m wrote:indeed i am not a fan of HACKS. pretentious hacks at that. his sorry copy and paste jobs got passed off as fine art and he even had othr people paint his paintings. how does that make him a painter? that makes him a designer. and moreso, a designer appreciated largely by pretentious insecure people with superiority complexes who talk down to people and ridicule them for having opinions and ethics. yeah, im talking about you, camoor

1900 called, the era wants its art and crafts movement back.

Pop-art won dude, and people want multi-color dragon tshirts. They don't care if it was lovingly crafted by hand last week or drawn by a computer 4 years ago as long as it looks cool. You're a smart lad, surely through your constant discontent you must have realized that you're a dinosaur in a mass-production world.

At least the colors were cool and the dragon was authentic-looking, this stood above any tee you could pickup at your local trendy fashion chain.

camoor wrote:Something tells me you're not a fan of Warhol. Art can be a collaborative effort, with one artist building off the works of the last. And there are generous souls who release images to public domain. We're the ones who lost the chance to buy an awesome shirt, so get over yourself man.

Warhol wasn't an artist. I don't care who likes him. He was a hack.

I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing artistic about taking a pre-made form and adding some color to it. I'm not saying it wouldn't have made a nice shirt, but it goes against what this website is about. "Here's a thought, make a shirt about it" shouldn't be, "Oh, tattoos have dragons, let me grab a dragon out of a book and submit it!" Absolutely no effort should not be rewarded. I don't like the friends image today really, but at least they were creative. This shirt was a cop out to get money, and it was rightfully rejected.

Okay - I never post on here but I felt the need.

All this talk about an art contest, integrity of the artist etc. People - what the hell?

I thought maybe I was out of the loop and didn't know the rules, so I went and checked. Nope - no mention of art.

This is not an art contest - this is a tshirt design contest! If you choose to do art - go for it - but as marmls2m pointed out (unintentionally of course) - this entry IS design!

reaseyann wrote:Okay - I never post on here but I felt the need.

All this talk about an art contest, integrity of the artist etc. People - what the hell?

I thought maybe I was out of the loop and didn't know the rules, so I went and checked. Nope - no mention of art.

This is not an art contest - this is a tshirt design contest! If you choose to do art - go for it - but as marmls2m pointed out (unintentionally of course) - this entry IS design!

Well said. I come to woot to buy things. I'm not here to reward the greatest artists submitting shirts, unless I want to buy one to wear.

AdderXYU wrote:Warhol wasn't an artist. I don't care who likes him. He was a hack.

Wow AdderXYU, we have something in common. I would buy you a beer if we were standing in a bar and you said that to me.