Derby #169: Phobias

Da Birds

Rejected because: There's compelling evidence that the falcon is beyond a reference photo.

add a comment

Comments

kdeuce


quality posts: 7 Private Messages kdeuce
Re: Da Birds


Ornithophobia...

..on cranberry.

cynic11


quality posts: 0 Private Messages cynic11
Re: Da Birds


phenominal work! voted for sure!

Paradox55


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Paradox55
Re: Da Birds


What's the bottom bird doing? Getting ready to poop on the guy?

capitalsown


quality posts: 1 Private Messages capitalsown
Re: Da Birds


You know, kdeuce, you deserve to place in almost every derby you've ever entered. Your shirts are actually cool almost all the time instead of being just like half the shirts entered here: dumb jokes and/or gaudily cute characters. Seriously, you, Drakxxx, and CrescentDebris are amongst the most talented people here. And I've said it before, not all your designs look the same. Not sure why people say that. Like I can look at a shirt and say "That's definitely kdeuce.". But I mean almost all your concepts are completely different.

jxchen


quality posts: 1 Private Messages jxchen
Re: Da Birds


This would be nice, but the bottom two birds are incredibly out of place. The others are clearly in flight, which makes the concept work well. Then you have one that looks like it's been shot and is falling, in an awkwardly stiff fashion. Lastly, one bird appears to be sitting on an invisible wire. This design would work if it weren't for those two elements. Individually the elements are nicely done.

capitalsown


quality posts: 1 Private Messages capitalsown
jxchen wrote:This would be nice, but the bottom two birds are incredibly out of place. The others are clearly in flight, which makes the concept work well. Then you have one that looks like it's been shot and is falling, in an awkwardly stiff fashion. Lastly, one bird appears to be sitting on an invisible wire. This design would work if it weren't for those two elements. Individually the elements are nicely done.


I was actually thinking this. Again, I said "almost". I stab the drawing part of the artwork, though. I think you should consider resubmitting.

sTyLeS


quality posts: 9 Private Messages sTyLeS
Re: Da Birds


I hate to say it, but it looks like these were traced from photos. Especially the bottom one that looks like he's in a weird perched position. That's not something someone would just come up with, especially since the others are flying.

bonerbob


quality posts: 0 Private Messages bonerbob
Re: Da Birds


I'm looking for a certain ornithological piece, you might have heard.

Oh you haven't heard?

KaylaJ


quality posts: 22 Private Messages KaylaJ
Re: Da Birds


I think the one bird is dive bombing straight down, but I cannot tell what the final one is doing. It almost seems perched.

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
Re: Da Birds


Those are some huge birds!

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

AdderXYU


quality posts: 38 Private Messages AdderXYU
Paradox55 wrote:What's the bottom bird doing? Getting ready to poop on the guy?


Apparently levitating in midair. I'd be scared of totally arbitrarily placed, ludicrously sized birds doing things that defy physics, too.

carmelpixie


quality posts: 0 Private Messages carmelpixie
Re: Da Birds


This is an bloody shirt. I do agree that the bottom bird is a little odd looking when compared to the other birds (being perched) But I looked at it as the bird is sitting there just waiting for that guy. Ominously waiting. o_o And for me, that adds some creep factor, which I like. :D

ragebassmasta


quality posts: 2 Private Messages ragebassmasta
Re: Da Birds


I stab birds and red shirts. Instant Want.

skippykj


quality posts: 16 Private Messages skippykj
You might want to stop using Windex with the streak free shine

ragebassmasta wrote:I stab birds and red shirts. Instant Want.


Classic Woot filter action. Woot just has no love these days.

MBrulla


quality posts: 12 Private Messages MBrulla
Re: Da Birds


You are incapable of making a bad design.

I agree with the previous comment...you can instantly tell when a design is yours (same with some other artists, except yours don't bring forth my gag reflex from "cute" overload).

You should just start your own site and sell your shirts...I'd probably buy every one.

palookaboy


quality posts: 0 Private Messages palookaboy
Re: Da Birds


Knew this'd be you, Kdeuce. I agree that your thumbs are usually recognizable, but it seems like you do sideprints an awful lot. That being said, I almost always like your shirts.

IgnatiusRiley


quality posts: 1 Private Messages IgnatiusRiley

I stab the concept behind this, but that levitating bird really does mess it up.

rocketjohn


quality posts: 3 Private Messages rocketjohn
IgnatiusRiley wrote:I stab the concept behind this, but that levitating bird really does mess it up.


this.

I've bought pretty much all the well drawn bird shirts woot has done, but I don't get the placements on this shirt at all. I'm not saying they are clip art, because i'm sure they aren't, but their placement relative to eachother seems almost random...

Cranberry


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Cranberry
Re: Da Birds


I stab the style, and would definitely vote for and buy this one if only that one bird didn't look like it was perched instead of flying. That ruins the whole thing for me, unfortunately. Excellent art, though.

SunnyLea0


quality posts: 14 Private Messages SunnyLea0
Cranberry wrote:I stab the style, and would definitely vote for and buy this one if only that one bird didn't look like it was perched instead of flying. That ruins the whole thing for me, unfortunately. Excellent art, though.


I have to agree.

Not that I noticed at first, but once it was pointed out to me, that's all I see!

bluetuba


quality posts: 58 Private Messages bluetuba
Re: Da Birds


I really wanted to like this shirt, but I agree the perched bird at the bottom ruins it. It makes no sense and kinda blows the mood.

"You can't just dress a Minion like Spock, and add a caption that says "Logical Me". There's a prison for people like that. Below my house."

H2ORip


quality posts: 1 Private Messages H2ORip
Re: Da Birds


the positioning of the birds seems a bit random, especially that bottom one....its standing like its perched on something...but not. Not really my style. I do like that we're seeing some stuff not on black though so kudos there.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
kschlege wrote:Corbis image?

http://www.corbisimages.com/images/67/B0A17DA5-C2BB-4FCE-9B1A-2270D7316ACD/61169-16.jpg


http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/1101/birdseh.jpg

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
kschlege wrote:Corbis image?

http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/Enlargement.aspx?id=61169-16&tab=details&caller=search



Looks pretty close to me


Well done!

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

Paradox55


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Paradox55
kschlege wrote:Corbis image?

http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/Enlargement.aspx?id=61169-16&tab=details&caller=search



Looks pretty close to me


keep looking- you'll no doubt find the others

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
Paradox55 wrote:keep looking- you'll no doubt find the others


Are you insinuating that the others are traced/images also?

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
kschlege wrote:Are you insinuating that the others are traced/images also?


I think that's exactly what he/she's insinuating. People who cheat tend to do it more than once.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

gunstrike1


quality posts: 0 Private Messages gunstrike1
Re: Da Birds


Just fix the last bird.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
kylemittskus wrote:I think that's exactly what he/she's insinuating. People who cheat tend to do it more than once.


I was just kidding

The reason why the feathers looked "stacked" is because the artist uses paper to create 3D images. So each feather is actually a piece of paper cut to look like a feather. That's why when you look at both images, the ends of the wing looks like a pyramid.

Spiritgreen


quality posts: 225 Private Messages Spiritgreen
Re: Da Birds


Hmm yeah, all good artists use reference photos and videos, the more the better, but tracing would be a no-no.

AdderXYU


quality posts: 38 Private Messages AdderXYU
kschlege wrote:Corbis image?

http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/Enlargement.aspx?id=61169-16&tab=details&caller=search



Looks pretty close to me


You guys are google masters.

People have been convinced Mr. Deuce does this ever since Freebird. It's nice to finally see the proof.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
AdderXYU wrote:You guys are google masters.

People have been convinced Mr. Deuce does this ever since Freebird. It's nice to finally see the proof.


Didn't find it on google. Took me about 3-4 hours of searching different online image sources to find it.

Don't google "bald eagle" ... I'm sure you'll get more results than you're expecting.

captainbaldie


quality posts: 2 Private Messages captainbaldie
Re: Da Birds


It's funny how many of you are surprised at the discovery. Everything I've seen from this guy looks blatantly traced. I assume the staff here won't care, as they don't seem to punish much for any questionable activity, but good on you for busting him down in his thread.

ronzalone


quality posts: 4 Private Messages ronzalone
Re: Da Birds


Well I was about to say I kinda liked it, except for that randomly perched bird that makes no sense and thus ruins it entirely for me, but then I see the images showing it was likely traced. I hope you also tattled with that image.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
captainbaldie wrote:It's funny how many of you are surprised at the discovery. Everything I've seen from this guy looks blatantly traced. I assume the staff here won't care, as they don't seem to punish much for any questionable activity, but good on you for busting him down in his thread.


I think all 4 images are trace jobs, but haven't found any of the other 3 yet. I'm guessing he might have traced them from books, because I can't find the other 3 images. (yet)

2 look like either ravens or black birds and the other looks like an eagle or kite.

effiew


quality posts: 0 Private Messages effiew
kschlege wrote:Didn't find it on google. Took me about 3-4 hours of searching different online image sources to find it.

Don't google "bald eagle" ... I'm sure you'll get more results than you're expecting.


Wow...that's some dedication you have there. Was it worth all that effort?

Paradox55


quality posts: 1 Private Messages Paradox55
effiew wrote:Wow...that's some dedication you have there. Was it worth all that effort?


I like to pay for original art, not traced images.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
effiew wrote:Wow...that's some dedication you have there. Was it worth all that effort?


yes

people should be paying their $10 towards original artwork and not theft.

albinoapple


quality posts: 2 Private Messages albinoapple
effiew wrote:Wow...that's some dedication you have there. Was it worth all that effort?


There's nothing more worth the effort than sticking to one's ethics.

effiew


quality posts: 0 Private Messages effiew
albinoapple wrote:There's nothing more worth the effort than sticking to one's ethics.


I'm not advocating copyright infringement. I'm not suggesting it's acceptable or that the artist should profit from stolen work. I just can't imagine spending *hours* of my life just to discredit someone's work. As a strong advocate of the arts, maybe I should care more.

Of course, some of the greats in art history used a camera obscura or similar device to project an image on a canvas to trace the outlines and properly judge perspective. I am less offended by the tracing (even though I know it's against Woot's rules) than the copying of someone else's work.

AdderXYU


quality posts: 38 Private Messages AdderXYU
kschlege wrote:yes

people should be paying their $10 towards original artwork and not theft.


More importantly, woot should be paying their $1000 to original artwork and not theft.

traverst


quality posts: 0 Private Messages traverst
Re: Da Birds

It's confusing to why this design got rejected, but this other traced bird design ((LINK)) did not. Both have other drawn parts to the design other than the traced parts, and both colored on top with their own style. It's either allowed, or it's not.

AdderXYU


quality posts: 38 Private Messages AdderXYU
traverst wrote:It's confusing to why this design got rejected, but this other traced bird design ((LINK)) did not. Both have other drawn parts to the design other than the traced parts, and both colored on top with their own style. It's either allowed, or it's not.


Easy answer: because woot is inconsistent.

More complex answer: because the other one was less blatant from someone less blatant about doing so.

There is no doubt mr. deuce traced his elements, while I recall being unsure myself about the silent night piece at first (and I believe in general there was far more uncertainty). In fact, if you go through his entire backcatalog, his work has ALWAYS looked like this. Very few exceptions look like it is anything but traced, generic work. The major difference is that Jewelwing obviously DOES have her own style, and one she uses quite frequently. While I think the idea that someone "doesn't know" that taking someone's images is wrong is a bunch of blather, I am far more likely to believe (and shake my head pathetically for the ethics of art) someone when they are well known for a degree of integrity and a sense of personal style than when the person in question is only known for generic, stolen-looking work. I have to presume that's what's at play here.

I totally agree with you that woot should be consistent, and that tracing is tracing is tracing. But I continually find it mindblowing how people come out of the woodwork with no-purchase accounts to defend the obvious frauds by bringing up the more isolated indiscretions of people who have proven themselves for years to have far more to offer. The implication is, quite simply, that this rejection is wrong because of this other one that wasn't. And that's simply not the case. Whether the one a year ago (seriously, again, no purchases in a whole year of watching this site?) should have been rejected or not, you are arguing that "Da Birds" should stay in, because they can't go back and reject a year-old design.

rjohnson313


quality posts: 8 Private Messages rjohnson313
traverst wrote:It's confusing to why this design got rejected, but this other traced bird design ((LINK)) did not. Both have other drawn parts to the design other than the traced parts, and both colored on top with their own style. It's either allowed, or it's not.


Reading through the other thread it seems that the other designer didn't trace but rather heavily relied reference photos, as they didn't line up correctly in Photoshop (which to be fair I didn't try myself, just trusting what others said). I question whether it is appropriate to rely so heavily on one reference photo to the point where folks would question whether it's a trace, but the case here was clearly as trace as shown by how perfectly the images lined up, and thus "more rejectable." I'm totally with you on the woot staff needing to apply rules more consistently, I'm just not sure that this is the best example to illustrate that case.

It also seems a little suspicious to me that it seems you have created an account soley for the purpose of writing this post, as you have no other posts and only created you account today, but are familiar with past derbies. Why do you not want us to know who you really are?

rjohnson313


quality posts: 8 Private Messages rjohnson313
AdderXYU wrote:
But I continually find it mindblowing how people come out of the woodwork with no-purchase accounts to defend the obvious frauds by bringing up the more isolated indiscretions of people who have proven themselves for years to have far more to offer. [...] Whether the one a year ago (seriously, again, no purchases in a whole year of watching this site?)[...]


Seems we were thinking along the same lines about this :-)

The person created the account today, not a year ago... Makes me wonder about their motives. Funny too, considering that someone else did the same thing in the discussion of jewelwing's design a year ago.

AdderXYU


quality posts: 38 Private Messages AdderXYU
rjohnson313 wrote:Seems we were thinking along the same lines about this :-)

The person created the account today, not a year ago... Makes me wonder about their motives. Funny too, considering that someone else did the same thing in the discussion of jewelwing's design a year ago.


The point is no less valid whether he made the account then or now. He would have had to be here then to remember it. So basically it's a guaranteed fake account.

rjohnson313


quality posts: 8 Private Messages rjohnson313
AdderXYU wrote:The point is no less valid whether he made the account then or now. He would have had to be here then to remember it. So basically it's a guaranteed fake account.


Exactly what I was attempting to say :-)

trekmiss


quality posts: 8 Private Messages trekmiss
traverst wrote:It's confusing to why this design got rejected, but this other traced bird design ((LINK)) did not. Both have other drawn parts to the design other than the traced parts, and both colored on top with their own style. It's either allowed, or it's not.


It's confusing to me why you had to hide to ask this question. It takes what may have been a valid question and turns it into a childish temper tantrum..."she did it, why can't I?" Of course, ultimately I blame woot, because their inconsistencies create this kind of behavior.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
traverst wrote:It's confusing to why this design got rejected, but this other traced bird design ((LINK)) did not. Both have other drawn parts to the design other than the traced parts, and both colored on top with their own style. It's either allowed, or it's not.


#1 Anything traced should be rejected. period. Even if someone applies their "own" colors, brush strokes, etc.

#2 Woot will probably start cracking down more that Amazon owns part of Woot and because of the Coffee fiasco last week.

#3 I think people are getting tired of unoriginal artwork.

#4 I could go on and on

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
captainbaldie wrote:It's funny how many of you are surprised at the discovery. Everything I've seen from this guy looks blatantly traced. I assume the staff here won't care, as they don't seem to punish much for any questionable activity, but good on you for busting him down in his thread.


Trust me. Most of us are the furthest thing from surprised.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

lunadust12


quality posts: 1 Private Messages lunadust12
kschlege wrote:#1 Anything traced should be rejected. period. Even if someone applies their "own" colors, brush strokes, etc.

#2 Woot will probably start cracking down more that Amazon owns part of Woot and because of the Coffee fiasco last week.

#3 I think people are getting tired of unoriginal artwork.

#4 I could go on and on


what coffee fiasco?

solusumbra


quality posts: 1 Private Messages solusumbra

oh common guys. the one shirt i was interested in in this derby, and you shoot it down...

skippykj


quality posts: 16 Private Messages skippykj
lunadust12 wrote:what coffee fiasco?


This one

Moondragon


quality posts: 8 Private Messages Moondragon
kschlege wrote:#1 Anything traced should be rejected. period. Even if someone applies their "own" colors, brush strokes, etc.


With the caveat that one could trace their own artwork (i.e. photograph), I'd say.

albinoapple


quality posts: 2 Private Messages albinoapple
solusumbra wrote:oh common guys. the one shirt i was interested in in this derby, and you shoot it down...


Sorry we believe in ethics.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
Moondragon wrote:With the caveat that one could trace their own artwork (i.e. photograph), I'd say.


I'd say no, but that's just my opinion. If you want to use a photograph for reference, that would be ok. But there is no artistic ability in tracing your own photo.

If you make a drawing on paper, scan it into a layer, and trace on top of it, that's not tracing. The original drawing was made by you.

This will probably make 1/2 the people here upset, but in my opinion, if you need to trace photos or other peoples work, then you shouldn't be an artist or a designer.

IndependentVik


quality posts: 11 Private Messages IndependentVik
Re: Da Birds


Disappointing, deuceman. Disappointing.

tico0001


quality posts: 0 Private Messages tico0001
skippykj wrote:This one


I don't usually read the posts on the dailies because I always figured that Woot did its homework... but holy cow that's what I call a gigantic fiasco!

And on the topic here... I'm really disappointed at Mr Deuce too

geekfactor12


quality posts: 11 Private Messages geekfactor12
kschlege wrote:I'd say no, but that's just my opinion. If you want to use a photograph for reference, that would be ok. But there is no artistic ability in tracing your own photo.

If you make a drawing on paper, scan it into a layer, and trace on top of it, that's not tracing. The original drawing was made by you.

This will probably make 1/2 the people here upset, but in my opinion, if you need to trace photos or other peoples work, then you shouldn't be an artist or a designer.


...

No, that's not accurate. There is nothing inherently wrong with tracing. It's a great starting point, provided you're using your own photographs to trace. It's even fairly common, particularly when you need to get something complicated like anatomy right (you might be surprised how many comic books use photo tracings as a first step).

Artistry is a wider vocation than you're giving it credit for, and everyone has different specialties and talents. As long as you aren't using someone else's work unlawfully or unethically, there's nothing wrong with tracing. Talented artists are still interpreting the work they trace, and translating it into a style and purpose all their own. It's still art.

(That argument is largely unrelated to the matter at hand, since this material was not the artist's property or creation. But I couldn't let the original statement stand, as I think it's ignorant of legitimate creative processes.)

chunkydesign


quality posts: 0 Private Messages chunkydesign
geekfactor12 wrote:...

No, that's not accurate. There is nothing inherently wrong with tracing. It's a great starting point, provided you're using your own photographs to trace. It's even fairly common, particularly when you need to get something complicated like anatomy right (you might be surprised how many comic books use photo tracings as a first step).

Artistry is a wider vocation than you're giving it credit for, and everyone has different specialties and talents. As long as you aren't using someone else's work unlawfully or unethically, there's nothing wrong with tracing. Talented artists are still interpreting the work they trace, and translating it into a style and purpose all their own. It's still art.

(That argument is largely unrelated to the matter at hand, since this material was not the artist's property or creation. But I couldn't let the original statement stand, as I think it's ignorant of legitimate creative processes.)


Have to agree with this. Being a designer means using the tools you have at your disposal the best way possible to achieve the result you´re looking for. Tracing is just another tool, another feature like any other. Then there are those who are able to pick up the traced result and use it as just another element of the design and editing it in a creative way to make it unique. Others just use the traced result as the final design, and there´s no merit or skill involved. The problem is with the way people use the Trace tool, and not with the tool itself.

bassanimation


quality posts: 98 Private Messages bassanimation
chunkydesign wrote:Have to agree with this. Being a designer means using the tools you have at your disposal the best way possible to achieve the result you´re looking for. Tracing is just another tool, another feature like any other. Then there are those who are able to pick up the traced result and use it as just another element of the design and editing it in a creative way to make it unique. Others just use the traced result as the final design, and there´s no merit or skill involved. The problem is with the way people use the Trace tool, and not with the tool itself.


I also agree with MJ's post. Using reference or an image as an underlay for the start of your project is often encouraged in professional art. There's a very big difference between that, and simply tracing an image and not adding anything to it.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
geekfactor12 wrote:(That argument is largely unrelated to the matter at hand, since this material was not the artist's property or creation. But I couldn't let the original statement stand, as I think it's ignorant of legitimate creative processes.)


Oh, so we're starting the name calling now.

Like I said, it's my opinion, and if you don't like it, then just say so, but you don't need to be calling people's views ignorant. nuff said.

geekfactor12


quality posts: 11 Private Messages geekfactor12
kschlege wrote:Oh, so we're starting the name calling now.

Like I said, it's my opinion, and if you don't like it, then just say so, but you don't need to be calling people's views ignorant. nuff said.


I apologize if that sounded rude, I didn't intend it as an insult. You can mentally substitute "unaware" for ignorant. (I would describe myself as ignorant of engineering, for instance- no one can be an expert in everything)

I said ignorant because saying artists should never trace (even their own photography) is a lot like saying no mathematician should ever use a calculator. It's a legitimate tool of the industry when used correctly, and to do certain kinds of art it can be necessary.

Tracing is not about replicating photographs exactly, it's about interpreting them, refining them, and adapting them to a new use. It is not in any way frowned on in the industry, and that's the viewpoint I'm representing.

mr96crabs


quality posts: 0 Private Messages mr96crabs
kschlege wrote:Didn't find it on google. Took me about 3-4 hours of searching different online image sources to find it.

Don't google "bald eagle" ... I'm sure you'll get more results than you're expecting.


lol 3 to 4 hours. i bet that was a blast.

jmmbell1987


quality posts: 78 Private Messages jmmbell1987
kschlege wrote:Oh, so we're starting the name calling now.

Like I said, it's my opinion, and if you don't like it, then just say so, but you don't need to be calling people's views ignorant. nuff said.


Calling something ignorant isn't automatically an insult, and opinions very, very frequently are ignorant. No offense, but even as a non-artist it wasn't a leap for me to agree with MJ there. Not that you are ignorant, which I don't think anyone is saying, but that having more knowledge in the area (that MJ has from experience) might render that opinion moot.

kschlege


quality posts: 3 Private Messages kschlege
jmmbell1987 wrote:Calling something ignorant isn't automatically an insult, and opinions very, very frequently are ignorant. No offense, but even as a non-artist it wasn't a leap for me to agree with MJ there. Not that you are ignorant, which I don't think anyone is saying, but that having more knowledge in the area (that MJ has from experience) might render that opinion moot.


Ok, I'll backpedal and say that a blanket statement of tracing/using images is not art. There are some exceptions, like Andy Warhol and the Obama poster. Those are art.

But in general, I still stand by my original statement.

capitalsown


quality posts: 1 Private Messages capitalsown
kschlege wrote:Ok, I'll backpedal and say that a blanket statement of tracing/using images is not art. There are some exceptions, like Andy Warhol and the Obama poster. Those are art.

But in general, I still stand by my original statement.


I just hope you realize how many famous, old, landscape paintings were, essentially, traced photographs through use of a camera obscura.

hashimotoyoshio


quality posts: 0 Private Messages hashimotoyoshio
Spiritgreen wrote:Hmm yeah, all good artists use reference photos and videos, the more the better, but tracing would be a no-no.


ah No, actually using ANY reference photo is apparently a bad thing. That's what I did here, http://shirt.woot.com/Derby/Entry.aspx?id=48094 And it's too close to the image. Can't take references and feel safe posting here. Might as well just create the whole thing out of your head. But don't make it look like a photo that exists...

More Derby Entries

By date:

By rank:

Thumbnail