IS THIS PLAGIARISM?

>>3081612
no

I believe they both plagiarized the character from a cartoon called mononoke hime

>>3081612
Yes, they both plagiarised Ghibli

>yuumei
boy her art's gotten stale

>>3081618
Chinese movie, not cartoon.

File: c.jpg (153KB, 792x1009px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 792x1009px

>>3081612
probably not intentional. that anime is about a girl and her wolves, so every fanart includes it. they might have just gotten the same idea.

It's the same composition. You can tell the second artist used the first picture as a reference from all the little similarities. The eyes are practically the same, like where the highlights are placed. The shading of the fur is the same, including where the shadows and highlights are placed. The girl's hair falls in a similar fashion--how it goes over the headband which isn't a part of the official character design. The angles of those white teeth like things on her necklace are the same.

Whatever. It's all bullshit anime anyway.

>>3081635
Psht---whatever...

File: the-great-japanese-epic-from-studio-ghibli-princess-mononoke-1997-princess-mononoke.jpg (663KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 1920x1080px

>>3081635
everything you said is wrong.

>The shading of the fur is the same
it's just a generic central lighting
>The girl's hair falls in a similar fashion
that's literally how her hair falls in the anime.
>how it goes over the headband which isn't a part of the official character design.
only the second artist placed the hair over the headband. the first one didn't, you can see it wrap around her hair and make that headband shape.
>The angles of those white teeth like things on her necklace are the same
that is also exactly how it's supposed to look in the anime.

>>3081653

It's pretty obvious that the first picture was used as a reference. Lighting isn't THAT specific. It would be a huge and unreasonable coincidence if the second artist had not taken from the first. I say this as an artist.

>>3081660
Not really a reference. Guy just copied the composition. You are crazy if you think anyone would reference from such low tier rendering work. Just a case of someone finding something executed poorly and making it better.

not sure how the law reads, but what i'm inferring is who the fuck would you complain to if it was a definite case of plagiarism? nobody. because it's not your I.P.

It's a very common composition to use big eyes behind a hero.

>>3081629
What a tasteless redesign. I'm always sad when I see someone with skill and a bad taste like that.

File: yuumeiflcl.png (238KB, 522x566px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 522x566px

This is all related to yuumei's recent upset at FLCL for "copying" her headphone design, isn't it?

File: plag.jpg (882KB, 2816x1666px) Image search: [Google]

882KB, 2816x1666px

>>3081612
clearly there's inspiration going on here but i wouldn't call it plagiarism, here's plagiarism

>>3081697
LOL who is this? Is there any more?

>>3081612
since they're both fanart, I'm not gonna hold some dude's composition as being more plagiarist than the designs taken from the movie. the medium of fanart is so derivative inherently that I just can't be bothered to get worked up about a heavily "inspired" composition.

>>3081697
guy even has the nerve the sign it.

>>3081697
I was going to say that you could just arbitrarily take some dude's study and pretend it's a stolen piece, but is it really necessary to sign it if it's a study? I think not.

>>3081719
>derivative
it isn't. even major official anime and game creators praise fanart of their work and happily retweet it or whatever.

>>3081724
I didn't say it was bad, not useful, or that you're a bad person if you do it/enjoy it. I said it was derivative, and it is. the charge in op is that he's copying someone's work. in a medium based around copying people's work, it becomes more permissible to copy a composition when you're essentially copying design work already.

>>3081728

If the artist is making big $$ off that composition, should he/she at the very least credit the original designer of composition?

>>3081739
maybe so, but it's inspired more than copied. the idea of the wolf behind, cropped at the eyes, with the girl in front is what was taken, more than the composition itself which is far more sophisticated in the later image. Since it was a compositional idea that was taken, is that not different from the character design ideas which were taken from the source material?

File: c.png (1MB, 1024x1654px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1024x1654px

>>3081739
>off that composition
the composition alone wouldn't get her anything. If she's making money it's purely because of her own rendering and skill.

no its just a fucking boring low hanging fruit of a composition so its not surprising theres multiple people who have the same idea

>>3081771
exactly. i once had a painting of a character that i come to find another artist made an almost identical composition to, and they had uploaded it just a few days before me. so i felt forced to delete it incase an accusation of copying them could happen. i really doubt Yuumei did this on purpose.

>>3081762
Is this thread going to turn into the style meme thing because this shit's hilarious

>>3081791
i was just thinking that , the my style your style thing is perfect for this.

>>3081668
Uh, but the first image is way better rendered than the glossy animu deviantart thing on the right.

>>3081687
what are you gay?

File: 1382644312204.gif (481KB, 500x321px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 500x321px

>>3081687
>tasteless redesign
>mfw

Didn't even realize it's San

>>3082473
they're both from deviantart. and that's scattering light, not gloss.

>>3081697
>>3081721
>>3081723
They were published within two days of each other....

>>3081762

It's not just the general composition. Objectively speaking, the girl herself is not plagiarized, but the background eyes and general composition certainly is. She did not change enough to make it her own. She needs to credit the background to the original artist.

>>3081612
See, this is an example of the concept of big eyes in the background that isn't a rip off. It's done totally differently, in almost every way.

>>3082845

Correction, I was referring to the image of San in a bikini with the red eye on the right.

>>3082815
Because its neckbeard shit

File: know you artist kronz.png (2MB, 900x1732px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 900x1732px

I guess not ,but doesn't that yumei chink make money out of the fanart she does?
hum

pic related is sort of the IC redpill.
spread the word about these fucking hacks

>>3082834
so?

>>3082885
Some of them are obviously not supposed to be taken as original, can't tell anything about the others, maybe they too.

>>3082894
don't waste your time. Ilya is widely hated here and no one wants to think anything except that he's a tracer/plagiarist. all of those were just clearly style studies that he stupidly didn't mention were not his, but everyone thinks he did that on purpose to fool people.

File: 2015.jpg (58KB, 478x630px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 478x630px

>>3081696

I don't understand, is her design supposedly revolutionnary? I've seen such headset years ago and they probably existed way before I first saw them.

>>3082885

yeah, that's a lot of hack work, but it seems because they are redrawing an official art piece, it's just normal fan art. You can take from official manga/anime but your not supposed to copy something from another artist.

>>3082905
She popularized them through indigogo years ago, but ended up selling the rights to Brookstone. Now you see similar designs being sold everywhere and featured in games and such. She got angry at Ariana Grande and now FLCL for not crediting her for the design. FLCL ended up apologizing.

>>3081612
Fanart always plagiarised official art anyway baka

File: maxresdefault.jpg (57KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 1280x720px

>>3082905
I googled neko headphones because I knew I saw something similiar years ago but found out the picture I saw was indeed hers. Guess she's right.

>>3082905
her headphones had another certain design to it besides the ears that show they copied it from her, so she was right. the show eventually agreed to credit her.

>>3081612
no

>>3082914
I've seen those headphones on a big sign outside Brookstone worn by Ariana Grande...it doesn't matter if who the original designer is. They're fair game to use in fiction like anime. FLCL didn't need to credit her, I guess they wanted to end all the drama because her fans were threatening boycott of the show.

>>3082911
yeah i have some of those, the production quality was very poor

>>3082902
Right, he just "forgot" to say in every of them it's totally copied then put them on selling.

>>3081612
Well I contacted the original artist about it and she says she doesn't mind at all so end of story.

>>3082834
And which one do you think was way faster to make?

>>3082933
well it's not like there's anything she can do about it anyway. sue them? both of them are using an IP that doesn't belong to them

>>3082939
so does that mean I can sell copies of these artist's fanart just because it's not their IP anyway? Or copy them and claim I did them?

>>3082961
>so does that mean I can sell copies of these artist's fanart just because it's not their IP anyway?
No, you'd be sued by studio Ghibli.

>>3082969

Does that mean I'm not allowed to sell Mononoke fanart at all?

>>3082971
i think it's fine if you're outside of japan, ghibli does hace a reputation for squashing doujin type stuff

>>3082972

yay so I'm safe to sell these fanart pieces that I didn't do.

>>3082969
i guarantee there's not a single example of that actually happening to a solo artist.

>>3082986
Yes. You don't own what you create, otherwise we wouldn't have the damn Copyright Infringement Act in the first place if you gain ownership over anything created by you. Until you put down legal paperwork of you being to rightful owner of said thing, anyone can make, sell, or recreate copies of what you or someone else created.

Case in point, Craig McCracken, who originally created the Powerpuff Girls, gave the rights to Cartoon Network to allow the show to air on CN. Do to this, this is why CN was allowed to make their own PPG without asking for Craig's permission. They didn't need too, since they own the PPG brand. This applies to all things created, no matter who originally made it, who owns the RIGHTS to it gains full controll over it.

You could sell that artist's art, if she can't rightfullyy sue you. But this usually results in the rights barrer having the power to sue your ass anyways, if there is someone.

>>3082885
Is it bad that I like his better than the originals? except for little Hermione, I cant choose which one I like best.

>>3083071
It's like how a lot Japanese artists can't do fanart of their own designs unless they use a pseudonym.

>>3081625
Clever, I giggled

File: van googly.jpg (2MB, 2512x1565px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2512x1565px

Depends if you're doing it just to make money, for a reference, or as an homage to the artist mentioned. Chances are the guy didn't mention the first, they're both shit in different ways anyway so why the discussion?

If you want examples of good real artists paying homage to eachother look at van gogh and millet.

>>3082885
all those are great: ilya give them his personal style instead of mindlessly copying. i'll never understand why /ic/ hates so much on this guy.

>>3086161
>clever
How fucking new?

>>3081697
I remember this, it was done with permission. Sakimi commented on the dude's work too.

No, it's just the lowest hanging fruit when it comes to composition with that subject matter. It's no surprise other people did it as well.

>>3087862
sakimichan is generally chill as fuck. in some of her patreon videos where she rambles she once said she didn't mind if people even traced her work as long as it was for practice.

>>3082885
That "cafe sketch" always gets me

>>3088376
Tracing her work for practice sounds like a really bad idea.

>>3081612

Imitation is flattery. We imitate our pets sometimes, even some plants different plants they are close to (mutation).

It's a form of flattery but in the end it will be seen as a form of insult but actually the true source couldn't care less unless it is reeling in money or leaving bad impression or violating patent/copyright protection that would affect its sales.

We don't even know if it is sourced directly from the original source (some movie cover) but both of them are either second-rate or third-rate. In short, worthless fanarts.