*so, sorry for typo. Also one small request: Could you please also include plain .obj (or collada) exports? It's a universal format and as much as Blender is popular, not everyone is using it, some older computers can't even run the new versions. Anyway these are amazing, I can't wait for more of your animals.
Great topo and appropriate polygon count, very good work. Are you also planning non-human models after this? Would be cool to see some animals or fantasy creatures modelled with your skills :)
It's extremely cool to see "real" low poly models here, so many of them and very well made too. I'm just not sure how copyright-safe it is to copy exact car models, but still anyone can easily change the vehicles slightly to something more generic and then it's completely fine, so great job, I truly love to see this.
True, I feel the same, no drama intended, I'd also hate to go much deeper on this. My impression was, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the rules that are in place ARE indeed mostly based in ethical beliefs but at least some of them are (again, as I perceive it) of practical nature, aimed at keeping this website a peaceful place, which in my book is absolutely fine, but let's just say so. It's an admirable deed to run a website like this already and there's nothing wrong in wanting drama out of course.
- I think I have stated it previously somewhere that I am not a fan of the rule that states art cannot be shared here unless the original author approves of it, even if it's free-licensed. The reason is that this is reintroducing permission culture back to free culture, it is negating the original goal of free culture as stated in Lessig's book, his goal was to make the CC licenses exactly so that people wouldn't have to ask for permissions all the time, that was deemed to be a bad feature of our art culture, so I just find this rule strange because it perpetuates it, but again, I will respect it, in the end I can share anything on my own server. I have shared public domain art here made by people who have long been dead now by the way, we can never find out if they'd object to me doing it, so this is also another complication.
- A short explanation of my ethics for those who are wondering: I would like to add that I don't see it as rude or disrespectful to use someone else's art in any way, on the contrary to me it's a sign of highest respect if someone uses someone else's art, it means the art is good. I don't think an artist should have any more right to decide what happens with COPIES of his art than a parent has the right to dictate how his child should live its life, or that who planted a tree should have the right to dictate who is allowed to breathe the air the tree creates. The notion that the creator is somehow entitled to "own" and dictate how all the copies of the art in the world are used makes no sense, it's only ingrained in our culture by the long existing tradition of copyright law, but it's not at all anything natural.
Though RE:Clint Bellanger's statement, I mostly agree with it (and wholly understand this policy on OGA), but absolutely despise how it's phrased. Ethical/nonethical are deeply charged terms. Is it icky? Sure. Is it rude? Absolutely! But I can't bring myself to say someone using a piece of artwork that was licensed under a license that explicity allows remixing is unethical, it's stealing a balloon on Free Balloon Day. My general motto is to be respectful to people so it's not like I'd go down this route anyway. I realize this is generally a very petty thing to point out (I understand that legality as well as respect is important for OGA. it's a good policy to have.), but I have a tendency to hyperfocus on details to the point of obsession, so...lol.
Thank you for saying this, I actually wanted to say the same thing but figured no one would care, so I appreciate you brought it up. I would like to second that we may have different views about what's ethical, my personal ethics is that any and all form of restricting information in any way is unethical, so I would rather judge unethical anyone preventing even his own art to be used in any way, I would gladly reuse even proprietary assets against the will of their author and it's only the threat of punishment that forces me to not do so -- this is not me deciding to behave unethically (like it was argued in the linked thread) but me judging my behavior as ethical, and I understand others may have a different definition of ethics, I just am not completely happy about equating rules of this website with ethics itself. I will respect rules of this website but will object if they're simply called ethics, they are just another form of local law here. I am now actually in the middle of extracting the assets from these images (there are of lower quality like you say) and will post them elsewhere, even if I wouldn't use them myself, I believe that if anyone wants to use them on own risk, the freedom to do so should be there.
By the way please don't take this as any kind of drama stirring or criticism of this website, I love this place and will respect the rules, just wanted to react to what's been said on the topic of ethics.
Made my day, there are many tiny bitmap fonts under CC0 but almost none true vector fonts, this is an awesome contribution.
*so, sorry for typo. Also one small request: Could you please also include plain .obj (or collada) exports? It's a universal format and as much as Blender is popular, not everyone is using it, some older computers can't even run the new versions. Anyway these are amazing, I can't wait for more of your animals.
Thank you some much, these are perfect :)
Great topo and appropriate polygon count, very good work. Are you also planning non-human models after this? Would be cool to see some animals or fantasy creatures modelled with your skills :)
Very nice houses, thank you for sharing :-)
It's extremely cool to see "real" low poly models here, so many of them and very well made too. I'm just not sure how copyright-safe it is to copy exact car models, but still anyone can easily change the vehicles slightly to something more generic and then it's completely fine, so great job, I truly love to see this.
True, I feel the same, no drama intended, I'd also hate to go much deeper on this. My impression was, and please correct me if I am wrong, that the rules that are in place ARE indeed mostly based in ethical beliefs but at least some of them are (again, as I perceive it) of practical nature, aimed at keeping this website a peaceful place, which in my book is absolutely fine, but let's just say so. It's an admirable deed to run a website like this already and there's nothing wrong in wanting drama out of course.
Also maybe two more points:
- I think I have stated it previously somewhere that I am not a fan of the rule that states art cannot be shared here unless the original author approves of it, even if it's free-licensed. The reason is that this is reintroducing permission culture back to free culture, it is negating the original goal of free culture as stated in Lessig's book, his goal was to make the CC licenses exactly so that people wouldn't have to ask for permissions all the time, that was deemed to be a bad feature of our art culture, so I just find this rule strange because it perpetuates it, but again, I will respect it, in the end I can share anything on my own server. I have shared public domain art here made by people who have long been dead now by the way, we can never find out if they'd object to me doing it, so this is also another complication.
- A short explanation of my ethics for those who are wondering: I would like to add that I don't see it as rude or disrespectful to use someone else's art in any way, on the contrary to me it's a sign of highest respect if someone uses someone else's art, it means the art is good. I don't think an artist should have any more right to decide what happens with COPIES of his art than a parent has the right to dictate how his child should live its life, or that who planted a tree should have the right to dictate who is allowed to breathe the air the tree creates. The notion that the creator is somehow entitled to "own" and dictate how all the copies of the art in the world are used makes no sense, it's only ingrained in our culture by the long existing tradition of copyright law, but it's not at all anything natural.
Thank you for saying this, I actually wanted to say the same thing but figured no one would care, so I appreciate you brought it up. I would like to second that we may have different views about what's ethical, my personal ethics is that any and all form of restricting information in any way is unethical, so I would rather judge unethical anyone preventing even his own art to be used in any way, I would gladly reuse even proprietary assets against the will of their author and it's only the threat of punishment that forces me to not do so -- this is not me deciding to behave unethically (like it was argued in the linked thread) but me judging my behavior as ethical, and I understand others may have a different definition of ethics, I just am not completely happy about equating rules of this website with ethics itself. I will respect rules of this website but will object if they're simply called ethics, they are just another form of local law here. I am now actually in the middle of extracting the assets from these images (there are of lower quality like you say) and will post them elsewhere, even if I wouldn't use them myself, I believe that if anyone wants to use them on own risk, the freedom to do so should be there.
By the way please don't take this as any kind of drama stirring or criticism of this website, I love this place and will respect the rules, just wanted to react to what's been said on the topic of ethics.
Thank you very much for a quick response. Yea I think technically it might pass as legal but it's potentially a little "nasty" :D
Pages