youmakemesik

^No, that's incorrect cause pixel sigs are not meant to be coloured in one shot by using a paintbucket fill tool :roll: You can use it to start off as your main colour ofcrouse, but pixel sigs are SUPPOSED to have atleast some colour-change/shading/lighting-effect... Oh and, these are some incorrect definitions, or 'exagerated' definitions of a pixel signature... "A signature made in paint or Graphics Gale" - That's not what makes a pixel signature, it's just a feature that most pixel signatures consist of... "A signature created PIXEL BY PIXEL" - This definition has atleast some degree of exageration, cause I believe that NO-ONE (and IO'm gonna go out on a limb and say not even TJ), colours/shades the signature PIXEL-BY-PIXEL, thinking of each pixel separately... I mean, when your colouring a space around 4 pixels by 4 pixels, and you do it all in one go, that doesn't take away the purpose/distinction of a pixel signature, just casuse you shaded more then 1 pixel at a time, when it would have looked the same anyway... I'd post more but I gotta go eat, cya ;)

I really doubt anyone will buy it if now, cause you just lost it's quality but the file size as gone up... If you've still got the bmp. file, get it back and save as png. If you don't have the original bmp. anymore, it's gonna stay like that forever...

Ok I guess you don't know absolutely anything about COPYRIGHT, RIPPING, SOLE-POSSESION or the word ILLEGAL... In other words, you didn't make that, so you can't play around or use it, without the original creator's permission... And that goes for everyone else on the board aswell... We can't do anything with it either...

Sry if I sound like I'm constantly accusing you, by bringing up the 'jabraulter incident', it's just that I'm using this case as an example to go on from... Now, firstly, Xero, get the **** off my thread... Secondly, LowGravity and everyone else complaining with him, please stop sometime soon... Anyway, I'm gonna try and 'question' or 'dis-prove' each of these explanations as best as i can... Erm, I really don't think this makes sense... How does taking a picture of a pre-made girl and working on from there, yield the same result as you illustrating/drawing the girl up personally? I really don't think it does, cause your using someone else's artwork and they would have their own style/skill/etc... Not to mention that THEY made it, and you'd have to explain that you didn't make the linework... Btw, why do you speak of us as "children", when in reality, we may be older or more mature then you... Oh and I have no idea what "roto-scoping a walk cycle is ripping" means, so I won't say anything to that... Um, waht are you talking about? Casue first you said you "took a picture" of the car, and later, you speak of it as a "drawing of a car, and not the real thing"... But if you mean you take a photograph of your own car and trace it, no, that is obviously not ripping... Why? Casue you are the owner of the photograph... You are the one that took the photograph, why can' you use it if you took it? If you mean drawing, well, I'd say that's ripping (or atleast dishonesty) to use someone elses drawing and say you made it... No, that's not ripping, cause you just said it yourself... You just clearly stated, that you took it from a "STOCK SITE"... Stock site's allow you to use the images without permission, as stock sites give you enough possesion to use the item for your own use (as long as you don't go and sell the stock image, for real life purposes)... I however, am talking about cases, that are NOT from stock sites... You just contradicted your 1st sentence with your second sentence... You said, in your first sentence, that you can trace, but if you don't tell the person you traced, your dishonest, but not a ripper... Then, in your second sentence, you said that claiming someone else's work is yours, is ripping... Yes but I am speaking of tracing the "Line-Art", not a coloured/shaded drawing... Now, with this in mind, directly and exactly tracing the linework of an image, would be VERY-CLOSE/EXACTLY the same as cutting the linework out... Yes but what's wrong with being a little child? If your 7 years old, that wouldn't mean you can trace whatever you want, just because your a little child...

You will now have absolutly no credibility on this board again. Morons like you should be banned. They shouldn't get banned cuz they amuse me wen im bored What amuses you is the arguments and controversy after the ripper has rightfully been accused, not the fact that they exist on the board :roll: They make a mistake, and are punished for doing somehting illegal... That gives every right to ban them and you can still get your ammusment, while it lasts...

works for me :?

That comment... was completely stupid... Look, as sragral said, he's either a ripper, liar or both... Now I don't care if you're gonna be all sanctimonius about it (look the word up, it should help you), but honestly, I'm christian too, and let me tell you, if you live by the way you stated that comment, you are an idiot... OK, so lets have some examples... we are not allowed to judge a murderer, unless we are the victim??? completely false and stupid... I don't care how christian you are, you can't say only the victim may judge the sinner... Otherwise, you'd say the law/police-force has no right to arrest criminals... That would mean mods have no right to punish rippers because it wasn't their own work... That's just being stupid...

6/10... Shading and colour choice is a bit poor, but you already seem to know that... Linework is actually quite good for a 2nd pixel, and that sig's probably higher then the standard of the average 2nd sig...

K, just read Stoked's and furious3's comments, and I've got them in my mind also, thanks for replyin guys...

K, I'm read both your comments and thought about them... But just a question bout forsaken's comment: I don't see how you can think that way though :? I mean, I sort of know where you're coming from, but I just don't see how ripping the direct linework of a landscape is ripping, yet ripping the direct linework of a body/human is not ripping :?

Ok, the first thing I'm gonna say is, I don't want this thread to get locked due to over-heated debates and/or cursing, etc... So please don't lose your temper here... Now, my question is, WHAT is ripping? I know the basics of what it is, but just after the 'jabraulter incident' I was just wondering, what would cross the line of ripping? Cause up until this point, my definition of ripping has always been along the lines of: "To steal (or use) features from another artwork, as features of your own creation, without permission and acknowledgement"... K so, the main reason I started this thread was casue the majority of the board seems to think ripping (tracing) lines from a photograph is not ripping... Now, I CAN understand that, I'm not stupid, but if you think of it logically, photography is a form of artwork... Along with other forms such as sculpture, architecture, painting, etc, photography is also a form... Now your opinion may alter or change, due to the fact that we use cases of 'forum signatures' as samples/examples of ripping, but in reality, if photography is considered a form of art, is using the lines of a photograph and directly tracing over them, is that not ripping, just in another 'degree'? Also, the second question I'd ask is, if someone (such as Peter, he does some nice ones) posts some photograph's, and I deliberately traced DIRECTLY over his photographs linework, and then went as far as to claim, that it was MY artwork, is that not ripping?! Why I ask this second question is casue if you believe claiming something (of someone elses possesion) is yours, after tracing directly over it, then that would change your opinion of what ripping is (if you believed the 'jabrualter incident' was not ripping)... Oh and by-the-way, Jabrualter, I'm not trying to get you abnned or anything, believe me, I'm just curious and trying to make a point at the same time, so it might seem as if I'm all against you, but ya gottta understand, thx.

I know, that sucks eh? :evil: Regardless of whether your the buyer or not, it's the most stupid and idiotic no-logic decision, to start a COMPETITION and then pick a winner after 1 entry...

You're completely pathetic, honestly... Changing your mind and admitting you bought it... Haha, if you'll droop down to those methods jsut to impress us, you need to get out more... Oh and by the way, Ragnarok, you are correct, Nadril is god 8) Well, to a certain extent ;)

As an official and finely-developed mod, I'm going to have to issue you a temporary ban for vocal abuse on the forums, and strange, unprovoked anger problems. Sir, I will be discarding your user-account from the forums if this behaviour continues and I have now placed you under 22 hours of anger-management therapy. C'mon King_Comet, I'm still waiting for the sig... I wanna see what you'll do for a whole 29k!

Firstly, the link and the guy with 2 posts has nothing to do with each other... So I have no idea what you are talking about... Secondly, not sure about you, but in my world, there's this really helpful search engine, called Google or something like that, and it finds heaps of stuff for you, such as GraphicsGale, in one click of the mouse... But, only a few million/billion people have heard of google, so I completely understand if you don't know about it yet... I only found out a few years ago too...

What the hell, this dude owned up to it, I think you should just shut the hell up. Oh no, he traced a photo, ripping? NO What the hell are photo manip sigs? You really suck, oh and by the way, the Southpark creators might sue you for copyright breach for using their characters on a runescape forum. (Very poorly I might add). Actually, Mr.x made that SouthPark sig, and it was one of his firsts :roll: What I really find funny,. and insanely stupid, is that if LowGravity has that signature, half the people here would say it's bad and throw in comments such as "atleast my sig isn't as bad as yours", but if Mr.x posted it as his first sig, people would be all "LOL! That's a nice funny style!"... Know what I mean? I got nothing against Mr.x, his awesome and I like his personality and artwork, but I still think a lot of people (here), have their better judgement altered with bias, depening n who made the sig...

TJ doesn't use paint :roll: Aside from that, the linework and shading is nice, but it REALLY needs a background, not just grey... Oh and, the image is way too small and so cliche if ya know what I mean... Wildy-pking-dragons-ranging-etc... Try and steer away from there, unless your fulfilling a request ;)

If the purpose of the banner/logo wasn't for a fenix type thing, I'd give it around 9/10, but yeh, it hardly relates to a fenix, as the colour chice is completely different and the feathers/wings look like leaves... However, I think that'd make a great nature logo :wink: With the green/black and the leaaves and all :lol: Nature was immediately what I thought of when I viewed it..Gj thuogh

Your second is a lot better, you can notice the quality of the second one is an improvement from the first, cause the first had so many mistakes ;) But yeh, the shading 'style' you were using before was really really bad, but now improving...

Erm... I don't know if you realise this but, that's not even a pixel sig :roll: A pixel sig is NOT 'a sig made in paint or GG', a pixel sig is an image made "PIXEL BY PIXEL"... But anyway, about this sig, personally, I don't like it... Why? 1) It looks as if it requires almost no talent, and I will explain if yo continue to read one... 2) It has absolutely NO shading or shadowing, you've probably even used the fill bucket... 3) Line art isn't too good, but I think the rock is ok... 4) Frames in animation are VERY lacking in quantity and this results in the sig looking very 'newb-ish'... 5) The 'dots' in the sky, whether intentional or not, looks very bad... That's about it... Improve them and it might look ok... ~ YMMS

Firstly, Aight, hm, I'm very happy you confessed to something you did incorrectly/illegally... However, that doesn't mean we can all just suddenly shower you with respect and I'm pretty sure you understand that... What I mean is, you can't do something bad, such as ripping someone's linework, and then just becasue you apologise to it later, expect everyone to think of you as a brave and noble artist... You know what I mean? Sure, it takes guts and some courage, I admit that, but it doesn't mean we can think of you as a real good person for going back on something bad you chose to do... What's happening is: You made a bad desiscion and have decided you don't want to be a part of it anymore... That takes courage yes, but doesn't make you a righteous person worthy of respect, and I think you understand that, so that's a good thing... Secondly, a lot of people here are saying it's very brave to confess, when no1 had any idea of the rip... However, just to correct you on that matter, jabraulter has already stated at the start of his thread, that he confessed BECAUSE The_Jeppoz suggested he could be ripping... I'm not saying what jab did, didn't take courage, I'm just saying some of you have got the case wrong... Thirdly, just to correct a few others on something: What he did is still ripping, just in a different form... Read on, and I'll explain. Now, if he used a photo for all of his character linework, that may not be ripping, in the sense that he didn't steal someone else's art, but it is ripping, and dis-honesty, to say that you created the image, without providing and presenting the sources that you used in the artwork... Now I wouldn't be saying this if he jsut looked at a picture and 'copied' it, but he actually 'traced' over all the linework... Hope ya understand... Fourthly, just gonna re-iterate a bit... I respect your deciscion and judgement of confessing, but I'm still gonna remember when I looks at your artworks now, that you have used other lineart's as 'Your Own' in the past... I won't hate you any more, atleast not purposefully, but what you did just kinda tags your reputation a bit... Hope you understand, I'm not trying to accuse you of a huge crime, and I'm not just being 'mean' or anything, I'm kinda looking at it from both sides... ~ YMMS

jab ripped the sig?!

That's all I gotta say... My previous comment and TJ's comment...

You don't ahve to bump 20 minutes after your previous post :roll: And for your information, the first one is better... Just loks as though you have put more effort and thought into it...

Text on first sig stands out (too contrasty), taking away from the dark mood and 'feel' of the sig. Text on second sig is very bad. Stands outs and well, is gernerall just quite poor... The 'flame' on the second sig has VERY rough/sketchy linework and doesn't really fit in with the sig... Over all, they're 'ok', but eh, pretty average overall...