[CSDb] - User Forums - Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics

You are not logged in - nap

CSDb User Forums

Forums > C64 Pixeling > Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal

2023-12-22 18:03

Sander

Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 493

Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal

Dear fellow sceners,

This is an attempt to get more understanding among, and for, C64 demoscene pixel artists. It’s not written to limit anyone, but a prayer for more transparency.

Read the document here: ->Graphics on C64 demoscene: Guide of Ethics – a Proposal<-

We tried to give define and value different processes. Which is a result of discussion, where we saw mutual grounds and felt the need to write these down.
We will update the document periodically, when enough input has been gathered and sorted out.

We’d really love to hear your thoughts on the subjects in the document.
Please post them in this thread.

(Personally I will not always fully comply to these guidelines myself, but I will continue to be transparant about it. However, I do agree with the values communicated in this document.)

... 137 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....

2023-12-25 17:26

Deev

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 206

Quote:

Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

This is not really practical when someone is deciding how to vote in a graphics competition, for example.

If someone has recreated another person's artwork and refused to include a credit to the original artist, why might that be?

2023-12-25 17:29

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quoting Deev

I would ask _why_ some people are seemingly reluctant to provide this information if they don't feel keeping quiet is giving them some kind of unethical advantage?

Because you should have a baseline of giving the benefit of the doubt, doing the opposite is destructive and antisocial, borderline narcissistic.

If you're being rude and demanding that i prove myself i'll tell you to fuck off gestapo, if you're curious and convince me of your sincerity i will gladly show and tell.

But just like when it comes to magic tricks, not always, sometimes an air of mystery is good for the soul.

Assuming ill intent as a baseline is what leads to socialism. Then everyone can pretend they're ruining the world for the greater good!

(Sorry, couldn't help myself 😎)

2023-12-25 17:35

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quote: Quote:
Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

This is not really practical when someone is deciding how to vote in a graphics competition, for example.

If someone has recreated another person's artwork and refused to include a credit to the original artist, why might that be?

First, were not talking about a competition, where the competition rules apply. You should judge accordingly.

Seccond, it may be assumed it's obvious?

Third, and most importantly, just how many "You dont know, do you?" can you apply to each and every one of your sneaky suspicions? Which is why i again, refer you to the text you quoted.

2023-12-25 18:05

Fungus

Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 629

The very premise of the title of this thread is evidence enough of elitism and gatekeeping.

Also this is some real luddite stuff, if you don't like AI, great, if you do, great. Should you be transparent? Always. It's not really a debate.

The whole demanding work stages is a joke, etc.

How many sceners copied Boris or Michael Whelan over the decades? I'd say a lot and never gave a lick of credit then, and they won't now either.

2023-12-25 19:10

Krill

Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2855

Quoting Nim

Its the same mistake most people make when it comes to understanding positive and negative rights. Bare baseline should not be considered wrong simply for being baseline.

This raises more questions than it provides answers. Care to elaborate?

Quoting Nim

Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.

I don't see how this somehow allows some "artist" to blatantly rip off another. Rip off as in not giving credit, thus implicitly claiming it as their own work entirely.

2023-12-25 21:00

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quoting Krill

Quoting Nim
Its the same mistake most people make when it comes to understanding positive and negative rights. Bare baseline should not be considered wrong simply for being baseline.
This raises more questions than it provides answers. Care to elaborate?

Baseline is you have a pucture, what ever assumptions you make say more about you than the artist.
Quoting Krill

Quoting Nim
Here's a crazy idea, if you want more context, ask for it. But again, it is not unethical to not provide any.
I don't see how this somehow allows some "artist" to blatantly rip off another. Rip off as in not giving credit, thus implicitly claiming it as their own work entirely.

It may be an homage, it may just be the context it's used in where it's obviously not original (like known photoreferences). The point of the picture may be the motif itself, the artist may just have challenged himself by wanting to try and see how they manage a certain gradient in a picture or whatever. He may not give a fuck whether you're familiar with the original work.

The lack of any meta information does not imply anything. If you make assumptions or worse, accusations at that point, you are projecting your state 9f mind, be it naive, nice or nasty.

Personally i like to live without regulations, people _who are told_ how to behave tend to have a lower ability to figure out how to properly behave given a new as of yet unregulated situation, than people _who learn_ how to behave. It's like people who conflate laws for morals.

2023-12-25 21:19

4gentE

Registered: Mar 2021
Posts: 119

@Fungus
Quote:

How many sceners copied Boris or Michael Whelan over the decades?

For how long do we have to listen to this non-argument, this tired old trope? Please, just forget about the stone age, we’re trying to have a conversation about the present and the future. This is especially weird logic if one considers that you wrote “this is some real luddite stuff”, just a few sentences prior. You know, same way technological growth happens, artistic growth also happens. Are you not aware of that? You seem to think that some ‘luddite’ people are trying to hinder tech progress, and at the same time you seem to be in favour of hindering artistic growth.

@Nim
Quote:

It may be an homage, it may just be the context it's used in where it's obviously not original (like known photoreferences). The point of the picture may be the motif itself, the artist may just have challenged himself by wanting to try and see how they manage a certain gradient in a picture or whatever.

What about 1:1 “tracing paper” style copies?

2023-12-25 21:34

spider-j

Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 449

Quoting Deev

It's interesting to observe that, whilst graphcians may not all completely agree, they can usually appreciate why these things are an issue for some.

It's equally interesting to observe how, in the case of many coders, they seem completely unable to grasp the most basic points of the discussion.

That's because coding works completely different than "art". There is also some creativity involved, but it's usually far less "personal" – at least when it comes to the compiled code it self and not how you represent it in your text editor.

There are only so many "optimal" solutions to solve problems in code. Usually split up in three categories: size, speed or balanced (size and speed). Once an optimal solution has been found there is no need to reinvent the wheel unless you question the status quo as being "optimal". So coding is to a large extend "copying".

A good example are the size coding competitions held here and on forums. Often they start up with a couple of approaches to solve the problem. As the compo goes on usually one or two approaches will be received as the "most promising" and people start iterating on those until the "best solution" is found.

---

Anyway: Although I do make a little fun about the matter I do understand why some graphicians feel the need to have more regulations – especially when they are more into the "competitive" part of demoscene.

I'd always argue not to take everything you do too serious and not "over-regulate". I like the way it is handled in music competitions where nowadays we distinct between "original" and "cover" music competitions.

I'm not sure if and how one could apply such a concept for graphic competitions. Until the rise of PETSCII and those getting their own compos there weren't even any distinctions about format made. What I always wondered about.

2023-12-25 21:43

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quoting 4gentE

For how long do we have to listen to this non-argument, this tired old trope?

Ok...
The point is it's ok because it is, not because it was ok before, but it demonstrates that it was ok before too. And its still not wrong, ok? 😉

There is nothing wrong with providing credits, workstages or even a parental note.
Go ahead do it, it's good shit!

But to then turn around and imply that not doing so is bad, is wrong. Because you're implying that by me not bringing a note from a parent makes me a liar.

Its also ignoring the hypothetical Mr.Gore who fakes his own parental note and joins the Big Red angry quire because it makes him look legit, and hes not the only one. Now you solved nothing and everyones pissed off.

2023-12-25 21:54

Nim

Registered: Nov 2002
Posts: 27

Quoting 4gentE

What about 1:1 “tracing paper” style copies?

Funny you should ask, i asked my daughter about what she was up to as she was tracing a picture just the other day, she goes to a primary school with extra curriculums in arts.

Her answer was, "I want to color it."

So naturally i gave her a scolding for being a fucking rip-off...