FANDOM


  • Regarding this thread, Smash brought up a few good points about how we should probably change the art policy so it's more clear and includes all forms of images, as well as what can and can't be done. I've spoken to him and Chames about potential new rules, which are listed below:

    • The slight alteration and recoloring official artwork are prohibited. Should you have doubts on whether or not you can upload the picture, contact the wiki's administration team beforehand.
    • Uploading commissioned artwork is allowed with the requirement of crediting the artist.
    • Uploading artwork of other people's characters is allowed if, and only if, concrete evidence featuring the permission of the character's original owner is shown to administrators.
    • Non-transformative alteration of official Sonic sprites is not allowed. Should you have doubts on whether or not you can upload the picture, contact the wiki's administration team beforehand. An example can be seen below:
    EllySprite1

    Elly the Dragon in Sprite form, you can see how it appears to be heavily altered from some Advance sprites to produce something new. Basically, transformative.

    Red Sonic Example

    Just some Sonic sprites with inverted fur and shoe colors. This isn't transformative.

    • Bases are allowed if, and only if, the user shows evidence that the original artist states the base can be used for free or is pay-to-use.

    Let us know what the rest of you think, and if anything needs to be changed.

      Loading editor
    • Everything here sounds pretty reasonable Mantis!

        Loading editor
    • (Nods Head) I totally agree with all of this.

        Loading editor
    • I use bases almost all the time, and I always make sure to credit who made the base and whether or not it's free. It sounds great so far.

        Loading editor
    • sure

        Loading editor
    • Normally, don't use bases at all with my work. However, this is 100% agreeable, reasonable, and must be enforced. Also, it really is about time from the previous forum, and this one to completely abolish recolors. They're lazy and abhorrent and all they do is make artists like me cringe.

        Loading editor
    • Kinda late 'cause I forgot about it, but I'd been meaning to ask what this would mean for the majority of this certain category?

        Loading editor
    • Smash The Echidna wrote:
      Kinda late 'cause I forgot about it, but I'd been meaning to ask what this would mean for the majority of this certain category?

      I believe it is unnecessary to maintain the recolored pictures from that category. Those can be deleted should these policies become active.

      One can imply the Trolls' similar appearances to the canon characters through their writing. We are not forcing users to create better designs but reprimanding those that steal artwork.

        Loading editor
    • That's fair enough. Because we have a whole category on them, I felt people should be aware that these rules would affect them.

        Loading editor
    • I like what Chames proposed, yeah. =v

        Loading editor
    • what happened here

        Loading editor
    • Makes sense. Sonic Fanon Wiki should not be just a bunch of cringy recoloring so I'm okay with this.

        Loading editor
    • We appreciate the positive feedback this proposal got from the community.

      This proposal will cause a big change to this site and should not be taken lightly because it will be enforced. If anyone else feels like giving any more input, please do so right now. 

      Should no one give any more input, we're gonna decide whether this update will happen or not through a community vote. It would be most appreciated to discuss your problems/concerns with these before the voting phase arrives. 

        Loading editor
    • My only concern is regarding users who may feel that recolors are the only way they can give a decent image of their characters. Sometimes a character can be well thought out and have a significantly different personality, backstory, and whatnot but look remarkably similar to a canon character.

      Now, I know we say a good description is better than a bad picture, but sometimes there really isn't much to how a character looks other than "like Sonic, but green with some yellow quills and blue shoes".

      I normally don't have a problem with recolors as long as they are IDENTIFIED as such. As in, the user doesn't just paint over a canon picture and try to pass it off as their own original work.

        Loading editor
    • I acknowledge but disagree with your statements, and for numerous reasons.

      First and foremost, people should know by now recoloring is and should be frowned upon. 

      People say recolors are "templates" so they get work on their character's designs from there. That's fine, but one can only expect disdain from others by publishing these "templates" publically. Recoloring is in no way decent and this practice should be discouraged entirely.

      Really, how similarily the character is supposed to look like the canon characters is irrelavant because people do not necessarily need to resort to recoloring to draw them, like this. A description is still better than a bad picture, nonetheless.

      The mentality of people getting away with stealing artwork just by acknowledging their mistakes is flawed. You can admit you have a recolor, but that's not really necessary as people can usually find that out in less than three seconds. 

      People generally know when someone is recoloring, people don't need a label to identify them. Whether you claim for the artwork to be yours or not, that's not relevant because, in the end, you still haven't gotten permission from the original artist and consequently is stealing their artwork. Get what I mean?

        Loading editor
    • Good point. Question: What about using an original picture as a base for your character? For example, this uses an official picture of Blaze as a base, but it's an original idea nonetheless. I would imagine this would follow the same guidlines as being a transformative work?

        Loading editor
    • Frost the Wolf wrote:
      Good point. Question: What about using an original picture as a base for your character? For example, this uses an official picture of Blaze as a base, but it's an original idea nonetheless. I would imagine this would follow the same guidelines as being a transformative work?


      Hmm... well, the thing is, the original thing - that is, that pose of Blaze - is still very recognizable when placed side by side. Plus it still looks quite a bit like Blaze, so it'd still count as a recolor/trace. Crymson doesn't even have an outfit like Blaze's, to be frank.

        Loading editor
    • TheDarkMantis15 wrote:
      Frost the Wolf wrote:
      Good point. Question: What about using an original picture as a base for your character? For example, this uses an official picture of Blaze as a base, but it's an original idea nonetheless. I would imagine this would follow the same guidelines as being a transformative work?

      Hmm... well, the thing is, the original thing - that is, that pose of Blaze - is still very recognizable when placed side by side. Plus it still looks quite a bit like Blaze, so it'd still count as a recolor/trace. Crymson doesn't even have an outfit like Blaze's, to be frank.

      Crymson's "super forms" come with a wardrobe change. Maybe in the near future she can draw a more original picture, as this was from when she first joined (four years ago).

      In addition, I'm kind of concerned my picture of Static would be considered a recolor of some sort. It does resemble Blaze a bit, even though I drew it entirely by hand. .w.

        Loading editor
    • Crymson's drawing falls under the first proposed rule. The original picture is here.

      Like explained beforehand, how much the character looks to a main character is irrelevant. If the drawing was made from scratch or a base was used with permission, you are not stealing any art and is therefore not tracing or recoloring. Like explained beforehand, the whole purpose of this proposal is not to force people to create better designs but to reprimand those who steal art. I hope this clears the misunderstandings.

        Loading editor
    • cool 

        Loading editor
    • Chamesthehero wrote:
      Crymson's drawing falls under the first proposed rule. The original picture is here.

      Like explained beforehand, how much the character looks to a main character is irrelevant. If the drawing was made from scratch or a base was used with permission, you are not stealing any art and is therefore not tracing or recoloring. Like explained beforehand, the whole purpose of this proposal is not to force people to create better designs but to reprimand those who steal art. I hope this clears the misunderstandings.

      Considering that said original is made public, I can't see why using it as a base would demand "permission" from the original artist. Sega isn't going to reply to anyone who asks to use it. I'm guessing that's why the first proposed rule is not to use official work in the first place?

        Loading editor
    • Frost the Wolf wrote:

      Considering that said original is made public, I can't see why using it as a base would demand "permission" from the original artist. Sega isn't going to reply to anyone who asks to use it. I'm guessing that's why the first proposed rule is not to use official work in the first place?

      The administration team had already gathered and decided that bases of official artwork are allowed as long as they are a blank base. Expressions and general poses are okay. Tracing over a canon character's prominent features (e.g. Sonic's spikes, Blaze's hair and clothing) is not a blank base and is forbidden.

        Loading editor
    • Aye-aye You Zoro!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.