Derby #189: Woodland Animals

All is left...

Appears to be photos

Rejected because: Appears to be photos

add a comment

Comments

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
Re: All is left...


Hope you like this design, I dedicate it to awlwren for pushing for higher quality designs.

Close-up / Wallpaper available for you to enjoy in my blog. Actual press-read file has even the fur in the outline of the bears.

Have a wonderful weekend and week.

spazzykiti


quality posts: 0 Private Messages spazzykiti
Re: All is left...


Artistic but I am not big on shirts that look like they were clip art instead of hand drawn. Looks great though.

synshyn


quality posts: 0 Private Messages synshyn
Re: All is left...


This is absolutely gorgeous.

awlwren


quality posts: 3 Private Messages awlwren
Re: All is left...


Okay, now I'm all embarrassed.

This is gorgeous, though. I love being outside this time of day, and you captured the way it looks and feels very well. I'm really glad you put this one up!

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
Re: All is left...


Thanks for the nice comments. It was all hand-drawn using intuos3 tablet and Photoshop cs5 on 3 layers.

I hope it makes to the fog

lakesler


quality posts: 0 Private Messages lakesler
Re: All is left...


Amazing. I love photographing silhouettes of trees at twilight. You've gotten the effect perfect. +1 and wish I could vote on it more than once.

heartflux


quality posts: 5 Private Messages heartflux
Re: All is left...


A nice change from the cartoony nature (no pun intended) of a lot of the other submissions. Nice job!

I woot, therefore I am.

MissFortune


quality posts: 0 Private Messages MissFortune
Re: All is left...


all i can think of is this thing i saw on deviantart a while back:
http://browse.deviantart.com/customization/wallpaper/?qh=&section=&q=tree#/dgwcee

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
MissFortune wrote:all i can think of is this thing i saw on deviantart a while back:
http://browse.deviantart.com/customization/wallpaper/?qh=&section=&q=tree#/dgwcee


Nice work by the artist, the bottom of the tree looks similar to mine. The "floating tree" idea is very old and originally comes from old China. I think the trees they drew were cypresses though.

jbb04


quality posts: 0 Private Messages jbb04
Re: All is left...


Visually stunning and cute at the same time!

streetwalkincheetah


quality posts: 1 Private Messages streetwalkincheetah
Re: All is left...


Seriously? I'd give this a 1 at best if it was on threadless. AT BEST. And it's in the fog here? Wept & then some. Damn.

jmmbell1987


quality posts: 78 Private Messages jmmbell1987
streetwalkincheetah wrote:Seriously? I'd give this a 1 at best if it was on threadless. AT BEST. And it's in the fog here? Wept & then some. Damn.


There are a few fogged designs that would likely struggle to score 2's at Threadless. Such is the way of things.

That said, I think this design being fogged is among the least of this derby's issues.

k8edid3


quality posts: 2 Private Messages k8edid3
Re: All is left...


a couple of quick google searches return the following images that seem to be traced/used for the bear silhouettes:

1) climbing bear

2) mirror image of this bear

and i agree with what was stated previously by MissFortune
flying tree

(if my internet wasn't acting up, i would search for the tree as well. wouldn't surprise me to find that elsewhere too.)

streetwalkincheetah


quality posts: 1 Private Messages streetwalkincheetah
jmmbell1987 wrote:There are a few fogged designs that would likely struggle to score 2's at Threadless. Such is the way of things.

That said, I think this design being fogged is among the least of this derby's issues.



Weird the Jesus before the wept part got left out, but whatever. One gone, let's hope for more. Fingers freakin' crossed

chumpmagic


quality posts: 9 Private Messages chumpmagic
Re: All is left...


I noticed the tree was a live traced photo, but I didn't mention anything because I felt I pushed too many buttons already this week (with the TMNT design and the 99% chance that Sekiyoku returned). However, aside from that, it also seems like woot never rejects tree/ plants (or environment details) when vector traced from a photo. I have seen plenty of photos go un-rejected here. It seems kind of mean to just pick on one design when many others do the same thing. Shouldn't they all be rejected then? Is that woot's doing or is rejection mainly based off tattles? I rarely tattle ( got 2 total).

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
chumpmagic wrote:I noticed the tree was a live traced photo, but I didn't mention anything because I felt I pushed too many buttons already this week (with the TMNT design and the 99% chance that Sekiyoku returned). However, aside from that, it also seems like woot never rejects tree/ plants (or environment details) when vector traced from a photo. I have seen plenty of photos go un-rejected here. It seems kind of mean to just pick on one design when many others do the same thing. Shouldn't they all be rejected then? Is that woot's doing or is rejection mainly based off tattles? I rarely tattle ( got 2 total).


I completely reject this claim and I am upset that this drawing that took almost 7 hours would be unfairly rejected without any proof.

That is a complete lie. Provide the photo you claim has been traced. I drew the trunk and branches in photoshop using the path tool along the way and then drew several triangles and trapezoids and rotated them around to make the leafs and later cut around to make the shape of the tree cleaner. I originally made them in two green color and then decided to merge on black so some shapes overlap.

chumpmagic


quality posts: 9 Private Messages chumpmagic
amh wrote:I completely reject this claim and I am upset that had drawing that took hours would be unfairly rejected without any proof.

That is a complete lie. Provide the photo you claim has been traced. I drew the trunk and branches in photoshop using the path tool along the way and then drew several triangles and trapezoids and rotated them around to make the leafs and later cut around to make the shape of the tree cleaner. I originally made them in two green color and then decided to merge on black so some shapes overlap.


Don't look at me. I didn't get you rejected. After reviewing more of the posts, it looks like the linked bears are what got you, and not even the tree.

And no I don't have a photo of the tree because I am not dedicated to getting people rejected. I just know what raster to vector trace looks like looks like.

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
chumpmagic wrote:Don't look at me. I didn't get you rejected. After reviewing more of the posts, it looks like the linked bears are what got you, and not even the tree.

And no I don't have a photo of the tree because I am not dedicated to getting people rejected. I just know what raster to vector trace looks like looks like.


No, you are absolutely wrong! A vector raster would leave holes all over the trunk of the tree, it would not have a nice outer line clean like this, it would have perspective defect, like the leaves would be mixed of vary large and very small ones in the middle. Additionally, I can't think of a tree that would have all leaves so spaced as to not be completely black in the center.

You based your tattle on a gut feeling that was wrong and unsubstantiated, Woot obliged and rejected my work off-the-bat despite me having more years as a member than you, and having been a respectable member of the woot community.

What you wanted is your "night hunting" design to do better, you are the one who should be punished for trying to win by tattling on others.

If my design isn't reinstated I probably won't be back around Woot for purchases or submissions.

The bears were hand drawn first roughly, and later, I went around the outline flicking my tablet pen to give the fur impression.

There was not tracing in any part, period, and I can;t accept to be rejected without any proof.

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh

No, superpose either bear. you'll see. mine is looking straight at the tree, the photo is looking down, The width is different, and the other bear, mine is looking straight down, rather than to the side. The flying tree bottom is very similar to a Chinese floating tree painting available to be seen at the Asian art museum of San Francisco. But I completely drew mine by myself, no tracing or anything funky.

chumpmagic


quality posts: 9 Private Messages chumpmagic
amh wrote:No, you are absolutely wrong! A vector raster would leave holes all over the trunk of the tree, it would not have a nice outer line clean like this, it would have perspective defect, like the leaves would be mixed of vary large and very small ones in the middle. Additionally, I can't think of a tree that would have all leaves so spaced as to not be completely black in the center.

You based your tattle on a gut feeling that was wrong and unsubstantiated, Woot obliged and rejected my work off-the-bat despite me having more years as a member than you, and having been a respectable member of the woot community.

What you wanted is your "night hunting" design to do better, you are the one who should be punished for trying to win by tattling on others.

If my design isn't reinstated I probably won't be back around Woot for purchases or submissions.

The bears were hand drawn first roughly, and later, I went around the outline flicking my tablet pen to give the fur impression.

There was not tracing in any part, period, and I can;t accept to be rejected without any proof.



For the third time, I did not tattle on your design...

but thanks for calling me a cheat, even though my first comment was defending you if anything since they don't reverse rejections. LOOK AT THE IMAGES/ BEARS THAT SOMEONE LINKED ABOVE... that its probably what they based your rejection off. Again, I didn't tattle on you. I just made my post after it was rejected because it confused me... sheesh!

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
chumpmagic wrote:For the third time, I did not tattle on your design...

but thanks for calling me a cheat, even though my first comment was defending you if anything since they don't reverse rejections. LOOK AT THE IMAGES/ BEARS THAT SOMEONE LINKED ABOVE... that its probably what they based your rejection off. Again, I didn't tattle on you. I just made my post after it was rejected because it confused me... sheesh!


Alright, I am just frustrated about getting original, untraced work called as such. There is always something out there that resembles something else. but there is nothing more frustrating than doing things right, and someone telling you you didn't. My apologies if my claim was unfair. next time, please don't just assume cheating. The tree, like all else there was drawn from inspiration of hundreds of pictures and drawings, but none was copied nor traced in any way.

I know if you were in my place and someone just called you a cheat when you weren't you'd be equally frustrated. Again, sorry for undue offense, just deep frustration speaking.

chumpmagic


quality posts: 9 Private Messages chumpmagic
amh wrote:Alright, I am just frustrated about getting original, untraced work called as such. There is always something out there that resembles something else. but there is nothing more frustrating than doing things right, and someone telling you you didn't. My apologies if my claim was unfair. next time, please don't just assume cheating. The tree, like all else there was drawn from inspiration of hundreds of pictures and drawings, but none was copied nor traced in any way.

I know if you were in my place and someone just called you a cheat when you weren't you'd be equally frustrated. Again, sorry for undue offense, just deep frustration speaking.


Well, That what my original comment was about really... Lots of stuff can have a photo/ live trace look to it. Some are actually live traced while some aren't. How does woot determine that? To rephrase a question in my first comment, why does this design get rejected while other that "appear to have photos" in them don't? Every derby seems to have at least one entry that I could replicate by live tracing photos ( at least the environment/ background) that doesn't get reject. It has always confused me, and the un-rejected ones always seem to be photos of trees or plants.

Also, I do understand your frustration, and I should have said this appears to me as a live trace... not that it is. It does seem like I just jump to the conclusion. Partly my bad.

lakesler


quality posts: 0 Private Messages lakesler

Wait, *this* gets rejected while a shirt that is identical in concept, and nearly identical in execution to a shirt up for scoring over at Threadless doesn't?

Seriously, Woot. The call on this one really doesn't make sense to me. The photos cited are pretty standard stock photos and don't match the outlines of the bears here. A lot of artists use reference photos and those are just a couple of very similar photographs you can find all over the web. I personally give the artist a +1 for style, execution and realism.

kothmac


quality posts: 0 Private Messages kothmac

This never should have been rejected...

cobaltgrl


quality posts: 6 Private Messages cobaltgrl
amh wrote:Alright, I am just frustrated about getting original, untraced work called as such. There is always something out there that resembles something else. but there is nothing more frustrating than doing things right, and someone telling you you didn't. My apologies if my claim was unfair. next time, please don't just assume cheating. The tree, like all else there was drawn from inspiration of hundreds of pictures and drawings, but none was copied nor traced in any way.


Can you talk to Woot yourself and provide them with the intermediate works?

I always assumed artists could do this if there were questions. I know some drawings can look like photo traces.


Earlysong


quality posts: 21 Private Messages Earlysong
Re: All is left...


Email woot and tell them. This sounds pretty messed up.

I love this website! ^^

Adam7986


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Adam7986
amh wrote:Alright, I am just frustrated about getting original, untraced work called as such. There is always something out there that resembles something else. but there is nothing more frustrating than doing things right, and someone telling you you didn't. My apologies if my claim was unfair. next time, please don't just assume cheating. The tree, like all else there was drawn from inspiration of hundreds of pictures and drawings, but none was copied nor traced in any way.

I know if you were in my place and someone just called you a cheat when you weren't you'd be equally frustrated. Again, sorry for undue offense, just deep frustration speaking.


You know usually, I don't bother to do this, but because you defend your self so hard core when you are clearly lying, I decided to make an exception.
Here is your wallpaper taken from your site:
Your Submitted Image

Here is the quoted bear image:
Climbing Bear

And here is the bear superimposed over a blown up portion of your wallpaper:
Proof.


So will you come clean now?

Earlysong


quality posts: 21 Private Messages Earlysong
Adam7986 wrote:You know usually, I don't bother to do this, but because you defend your self so hard core when you are clearly lying, I decided to make an exception.
Here is your wallpaper taken from your site:
Your Submitted Image

Here is the quoted bear image:
Climbing Bear

And here is the bear superimposed over a blown up portion of your wallpaper:
Proof.


So will you come clean now?

Okay, as I understand it, artists can use reference photos-right? I looked at that last link, and that seems to prove that he did NOT trace it-the edge doesn't match up at all! It looks like he just use it for reference, which is, as I understand it, perfectly acceptable.

I don't get why this is cheating...?

I love this website! ^^

k8edid3


quality posts: 2 Private Messages k8edid3
Adam7986 wrote:You know usually, I don't bother to do this, but because you defend your self so hard core when you are clearly lying, I decided to make an exception.

And here is the bear superimposed over a blown up portion of your wallpaper:
Proof.


So will you come clean now?


Thank you! You could have done the same with the mirror image of the other bear photo, too. I would have had more respect for the artist if he/she would have come clean in the first place, rather than swearing up and down that it wasn't a trace or copy. I really did enjoy the artist's previous gnome cassette tape design. However, after this, I'm not sure I can support someone of this character.

Adam7986


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Adam7986
Earlysong wrote:Okay, as I understand it, artists can use reference photos-right? I looked at that last link, and that seems to prove that he did NOT trace it-the edge doesn't match up at all! It looks like he just use it for reference, which is, as I understand it, perfectly acceptable.

I don't get why this is cheating...?


The edges don't match because I am sure that he/she (don't know for sure) added some strokes to the bear to make it look like fur. Also, I didn't erase everything microscopically so you get straight lines where I am sure they weren't completely straight.

It is one thing to take an image and use it as reference, it is another thing entirely to take an image, make it a silhouette and claim you created it.

I think at the end of the day it turned out to be a good design, but my beef comes with the fact the artist flat out claims that the image was made from scratch. Just own up to your work.

Adam7986


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Adam7986
k8edid3 wrote:Thank you! You could have done the same with the mirror image of the other bear photo, too. I would have had more respect for the artist if he/she would have come clean in the first place, rather than swearing up and down that it wasn't a trace or copy. I really did enjoy the artist's previous gnome cassette tape design. However, after this, I'm not sure I can support someone of this character.


You know, it is one instance and I get the not supporting the character of the artist. I am not trying to attack the artist, I just want them to own up to it and move on. It is honestly a temptation a lot of graphic designers deal with/succumb to. Don't swear them off if learn their lesson.

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
Re: All is left...


to all,
you are right in that my reaction was perhaps too strong. The fact is that i honestly did not trace a single image. I researched each element of my design and drewn from scratch only inspired by not one but many images and photos. I can tell you that any artistic work can be deconstructed and similarities found of part of one work with parts of another. What makes the artist an artist is seeing elements and reinterpreting them and combining. Somehow there are out of millions of photos of bears on the internet 2 fotos of bears in positions similar to my bears which are only part of my composition and I am called a cheat. If so, let's deconstruct every song written in the last century into not even words but sentences, not notes but riffs and you'll see that very similar ones already existed. There is no cheating, we as artists hear these riffs and sentences and later incorporate some elements that were similar elsewhere and make them our own with creations that don't violate copyright. Additionally, we see artists like picasso that reinterpreted the quijote, or the grymm brothers who reinterpreted urban legend and made it a unique set of tales. The smaller the pieces of an artwork you try to compare, the more likely you are to find something similar if you are looking for it. I will be likely leaving woot as this incident along with the corporate response and some members response to it has hurt me and made something a did for fun for myself and to please those who enjoyed my work has made me sad rather than happy. I do however thank those who enjoyed what I did, I'll be reachable through my blogg and at magnatia@gmail.com for any questions or just to chat about anything. I also want to tell those who worry about finding a way to destroy others to try to enjoy things and their lives more. Finally, I promise to all that I truly believe in my integrity, and despite the fact that tracing is in no-way infringement on someone else's property if you have essentially changed the original work, I have not done so in this case.
Sorry if anyone who did nothing wrong was offended by my outburst. Most users in woot are fantastic and do great work, as well as support smalll artists through this site. To you, I wish the best. For now I'm back to only doing my day-job as programmer and student. Maybe some day I'll find the wisdom to get over this silly episode and design or buy again from Woot (who by the way has not responded to any of my messages)
Amir Mesguich

clbevilacqua


quality posts: 0 Private Messages clbevilacqua
Adam7986 wrote:You know usually, I don't bother to do this, but because you defend your self so hard core when you are clearly lying, I decided to make an exception.
Here is your wallpaper taken from your site:
Your Submitted Image

Here is the quoted bear image:
Climbing Bear
I'm sorry to disagree with your 'proof', but my daughter and I are both artists and either of us could free-hand draw the silhouette of that bear to fit that super-imposed image.
And here is the bear superimposed over a blown up portion of your wallpaper:
Proof.


So will you come clean now?

k8edid3


quality posts: 2 Private Messages k8edid3
Adam7986 wrote:You know, it is one instance and I get the not supporting the character of the artist. I am not trying to attack the artist, I just want them to own up to it and move on. It is honestly a temptation a lot of graphic designers deal with/succumb to. Don't swear them off if learn their lesson.


I completely agree to not writing someone off when it's a first time offense and they've learned their lesson. If this artist would have initially owned up to it, I would have been fine with it. However, he is still standing by his, "It's all original and I didn't do anything wrong."

After this issue, he claims he will not be returning. In a way, since he still doesn't see anything wrong with what he did, I'm glad he won't be returning. But, I'm also a little sad to see him go since his previous entries were pretty good and I was a supporter.

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
k8edid3 wrote:I completely agree to not writing someone off when it's a first time offense and they've learned their lesson. If this artist would have initially owned up to it, I would have been fine with it. However, he is still standing by his, "It's all original and I didn't do anything wrong."

After this issue, he claims he will not be returning. In a way, since he still doesn't see anything wrong with what he did, I'm glad he won't be returning. But, I'm also a little sad to see him go since his previous entries were pretty good and I was a supporter.


K8edid3: I'm sad you don't believe me, but there isn't much I can do except tell you that if someone tries to find a relatively small part of a artwork which in this case is just an outline, and tries adjusting a similar photo to it by stretching, rotating, skewing, etc. All realistic artwork is then possible to be considered traced from somewhere. In this case, all I can do is give my sincere word that I did not do that. As I said, I also hope that people that start with an assumption of dishonesty and try to adjust external content to make their claim appear substantiated spend instead their time producing original art of better quality than the one they are biased against. As for the rest of Woot, the majority of user, keep being the same, you're awesome. Too bad a few ruin it for the rest.

amh


quality posts: 2 Private Messages amh
Adam7986 wrote:You know usually, I don't bother to do this, but because you defend your self so hard core when you are clearly lying, I decided to make an exception.
Here is your wallpaper taken from your site:
Your Submitted Image

Here is the quoted bear image:
Climbing Bear

And here is the bear superimposed over a blown up portion of your wallpaper:
Proof.


So will you come clean now?


Adam7986: Your "proof" made me laugh, it proves what happened, which is that I did not trace. The photo bear is missing a back leg that is present on my design, as well as facing the wrong way, look at the left cheek. also, mine has a bigger tummy and a completely different front leg that extrudes beyond the tree. Not to mention the fact that you modified size and rotated the image to fit the outline of the silhouette I drew. The only thing that has any similarity is some parts of the outline (even that it does very loosely), which in turn is only part of a bear, which in turn is just one element of my design.

Adam7986


quality posts: 0 Private Messages Adam7986
amh wrote:Adam7986: Your "proof" made me laugh, it proves what happened, which is that I did not trace. The photo bear is missing a back leg that is present on my design, as well as facing the wrong way, look at the left cheek. also, mine has a bigger tummy and a completely different front leg that extrudes beyond the tree. Not to mention the fact that you modified size and rotated the image to fit the outline of the silhouette I drew. The only thing that has any similarity is some parts of the outline (even that it does very loosely), which in turn is only part of a bear, which in turn is just one element of my design.


Dude I think your previous work was really good and I really don't want you stop trying to be an artist and designer, you have awesome potential. My whole problem is with the denying of everything. your right I had to blow up your wall paper image and rotate it to fit, but that is natural step if you made the bear silhouette smaller to fit your image, so you can't really count that against me.

As I explained earlier, I didn't want to take 45 mins and perfectly crop the photo and another hour to make the silhouette the same way you did. But the bear fits, and I actually made it smaller in the shadow so people could see how the lines match up, if made it the exact same size it would just look like I pasted the bear over your image.

Look man, I really am not doing this to attack you, I have no reason to, you seem like a good guy; however, the fact remains that pretty clearly you didn't draw this as you said you did. I made the images initially to see for myself and decided to post them because they were so clearly the same.

And for your claim about artists tracing, if take an image and do an interpretation of it with the image owners permission, that is allowed. If I take a copy written image, change it and claim it as my own, well thats just plain wrong.

I hope you see that you are better than doing that and continue to work on your art. You do well when you try on your own, but please don't tell us that this is an original piece when it clearly is not.

darkbard


quality posts: 0 Private Messages darkbard

Nevermind... erasing my comment, seemed to have been posted in the wrong place.

darkbard


quality posts: 0 Private Messages darkbard

Editing comment. Posted in the wrong place.

P.S. why is the word L.A.M.E. filtered but crap isn't?

darkbard


quality posts: 0 Private Messages darkbard

It's a shame that your design was rejected. It's beautiful. Most of the other entries are crap. I would have purchased this one.

k8edid3


quality posts: 2 Private Messages k8edid3
amh wrote:K8edid3: I'm sad you don't believe me, but there isn't much I can do except tell you that if someone tries to find a relatively small part of a artwork which in this case is just an outline, and tries adjusting a similar photo to it by stretching, rotating, skewing, etc. All realistic artwork is then possible to be considered traced from somewhere. In this case, all I can do is give my sincere word that I did not do that. As I said, I also hope that people that start with an assumption of dishonesty and try to adjust external content to make their claim appear substantiated spend instead their time producing original art of better quality than the one they are biased against. As for the rest of Woot, the majority of user, keep being the same, you're awesome. Too bad a few ruin it for the rest.


Here's the thing. The derbies are kind of a big deal. Those who have a shirt design picked for printing receive $1000. When I saw this design that looked like a photo, I was a little suspicious. I only did a quick (and I mean quick) google search for bear images. When I discovered that they looked a little too similar for being original work, I posted the links. I didn't even click on the "tattle" button. I just posted them and stated my opinon. It was up to others to decide if they agreed with me or not. Turns out the woot judges agreed and rejected your design. And then when Adam posted the bear photo overlayed on your work, it just proved my suspicion. I don't think it's fair for someone to use others' work and pass it off as their own to then win $1000. Sorry you don't see the error of your ways and that you feel "I ruin it for the rest..." I'm just trying to keep things fair.

And as Adam stated, "I hope you see that you are better than doing that and continue to work on your art. You do well when you try on your own..." I agree with this and hope you continue with your OWN original work because I did enjoy it.

penthus


quality posts: 3 Private Messages penthus
k8edid3 wrote:Here's the thing. The derbies are kind of a big deal. Those who have a shirt design picked for printing receive $1000. When I saw this design that looked like a photo, I was a little suspicious. I only did a quick (and I mean quick) google search for bear images. When I discovered that they looked a little too similar for being original work, I posted the links. I didn't even click on the "tattle" button. I just posted them and stated my opinon. It was up to others to decide if they agreed with me or not. Turns out the woot judges agreed and rejected your design. And then when Adam posted the bear photo overlayed on your work, it just proved my suspicion. I don't think it's fair for someone to use others' work and pass it off as their own to then win $1000. Sorry you don't see the error of your ways and that you feel "I ruin it for the rest..." I'm just trying to keep things fair.

And as Adam stated, "I hope you see that you are better than doing that and continue to work on your art. You do well when you try on your own..." I agree with this and hope you continue with your OWN original work because I did enjoy it.


Not to mention that such traces fall into the category of art theft. I don't think Amh fully comprehends what all constitutes art theft, and that's unfortunate. I think the evidence is pretty clear and speaks for itself, as someone who frequents a site that is very strict about this sort of thing. I agree with K8edid3 entirely.

It is, design wise, very nice. But I can't overlook that trace. His argument to 100% originality sort of falls short when he won't offer proof that his image is 100% original. Most artists I know, myself included, knows how to provide preliminary sketches and stages, especially with digital work. The burden of proof is on the artist.

More Derby Entries

By date:

By rank:

Thumbnail

Whoa there buckaroo!

If you wanna vote, you need to first. Be sure to using an account with at least one purchase, otherwise you won't be able to participate. Sorry we called you buckaroo.