Back in 1985, saw a B&W line art of Mr.Spock from the back of a Trek fanzine. I had my mom photocopy the drawing onto a transparency. I then taped it to my friend's 1702 monitor, and use his C64 lightpen to paint over what was literally a physical mask. I think I used Doodle. Looked great. Got a commendation for original thinking. It wasn't scanned, but it wasn't technically entirely free-hand drawn either. Yes, my hand did all drawing, but I was using a mask.
I saw you struggle on "canned heat" and it's origin is in sterno which is a small metal can of a jellied substance that burns. It use outside of it's product use was in a novel. I'm going to have to give you some background here, back in the 1910's to 20's a canned heat drunk was a person who actually drank sterno to get drunk. since it's a form of denatured alcohol, it's quite dangerous to drink but i guess when your addicted and need a drink anything with alcohol will work. Anyway there is a line in the novel "no place like homicide" by J. Archibald back in the 1940's where the term is used as "the canned heat drunk". Please note that during prohibition here in the U.S. lots of hobo's and poor were using cloth and socks to strain the sterno to make something called "squeeze" or if they added fruit juice it was called "jungle juice". It was dangerous, blindness was common and sometimes death so yeah i think in this context though, canned is referring to the fact the car is like a can, made of metal and holds a thing which in this case is a person and heat meaning fast. There is also a slang meaning that i know of which would be a prostitute in jail with a nymphomaniac issue, but I've only ever heard it used derogatorily about women who are good looking but won't give you the time of day. Weird how things change to just stay the same. Anyway hope this helps you out. Edit: I should add that the first know use of it as alcohol dates back to the early 1910's to 20's. I forgot to put a date but I'm writing this just as I'm leaving with my wife to go see a movie so.... gotta go. :)
At this point, the Classic and Open categories make sense. There is a guy who traces pictures into deluxe paint using a tablet but never mentions it's as a trace, and people don't know any better and praise the work; if it was marked as open and disclosed that it is a copy, that might be a better way of doing it. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
I am both graphician and coder. I can understand the discussion. For competitions this is important but also in other areas too e.g. game production. For me it is clear, if I (re-)use ideas from others, i have to credit them. I am currently working on a C64 game which is a conversion of a original ZX Spectrum game. I asked the original coder if I can make a C64 version out of it. And ofcourse he will be credited, not only because he did the original game but also because I can use his original levels. In the graphics area it is the same, we "converted" the original title picture to C64 and made our own interpretation out of it, the original author will be mentioned. All graphics are completely pixelled by hand on our own, but if we re-use ideas of others, its clear and only fair to mention them. But for me the questions go even further: What if I use assembly routines I learned from codebase64 ? Do I need to credit each original author ? How many coders are re-using code or codefragments from others ? I am not the only one. To be fair I decided that I will release my game together with its source code on github and all routines taken from others are marked with comments and a hint from where I have the routine if that routine was not written 100% on my own.
I agree with the creation references. Using routines and snippets of code is stretching it. For copyright there is the concept of a threshold of originality and much of codebase is generic standard implementation of small segments that most people would code the same. So under the threshold for copyright. I use the disk routines on a regular basis, the Cadaver loader and Exomizer - cant say I credit the people behind enough. (i talk to both Magnus and Lasse on a regular basis so they know of my use).
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Fairlight. I agree that it was a witch hunt against Magnar. Magnar is a colleague and a scene friend that has his ethics in the right place. Thank you for the sober view on the topic.
Wouldn't the easiest be just to make three categories for C64 art? Original work, inspired work and tool assisted work. Edit: this was just suggested in the video at 18:20 and I have to agree that it seems like the simplest solution.
i agree with the final point that we need multiple categories so people can have options on how to participate instead of hating on each other and feeling cheated. i'm also proponent of just having showcases instead of competitions, where artist can share their work openly and not battle for placement on who is the best, just admire the different techniques and influences of each other.
I do believe we need competitions, to keep pushing the envelope on whats possible. But also that its impossible to stop wiring tools, AI and other techniques. It will only be a question who cheats and gets away with it unless its addressed.
It's funny how this is exactly the same as the "should unity and unreal engine be allowed in demo compos" conversation couple of years ago. In my opinion scene always mirrors the games industry, and neither of these are an exception to that. Time marches on, tools of content production change, and old men are yelling at clouds. It was really hard for me to accept that democompo can be won with Tim Sweeney's shaders. Like, even every single shader in the post processing stack of many modern demos ( - and AAA games too) is a huge project in itself, to get them look nice, to work reliably, with all three GPU vendors. I spent a huge amount of time on that stuff, and then it was somehow really hard to accept emotionally that all this was now just a commodity. People also can't tell. On the C64 as well, people can just see a nice picture on the screen and there's only a small minority who can really tell how this is different from others, and how much pain the author had to go through. Maybe most atleast know that stuff in borders is hard to do, but in mixed oldskool compos, how does it differ from an Amiga? A gloom view maybe. But abstraction levels will then bring out new innovations, and it's not like oil painting will ever become obsolete. Maybe.
Some kind of objective approach: 1) If you want to see more new X, reward it by voting it highly. Everyone gets what they wish for. 2) There will always be cheaters who try to win by cheating (defined as: breaking the rules stated for the competition), and cheating is not voted on in sport. It's not allowed in sport, and you can be banned from competing. 3) A competition is like a sport, with winners chosen (and only the winners are celebrated = named/applauded/given prizes at the end of the competition). 1) is solved by declaring the content, everyone votes according to their likes. Ofc cheaters can lie about the content, and then voters will be put on the spot, they suspect but can't be sure. 2) is solved by stating which content you want in the competition (e.g. not released before and drawn by you). Again, cheaters can lie and say that it's content that meets the rules, making 1) very difficult for voters. After the party, organizers decide themselves if they want more content that violates the rules from the same author next year. 3) Demoscene compos are made unsportsmanlike, everyone gets a cookie for participating, there's no voting, and no prizes. Subjective approach: I think cheating demotivates people from competing, and that the Demoscene can be exclusivist shrinking club, because friends first and foremost vote up friends. I don't mind some drama to inject some spice and life into the Demoscene, but it would be nice if we could be aware of and improve those two things.
After seeing the direct conversion using a coverter program and contrasting it to what Magnar did, it is clearly different. I no longer think he use a program to just do a conversion.
Just credit whoever made the original, is all. No shame, hate or flaming required. Also, if you happen to be an organiser of a party and intend to use AI or plagiarise (albeit tastefully) another artist's work for a competition submission then perhaps do not state any of that to be a violation of the competition rules...
@@FairLight1337 All we have is credit. We make our demoscene contributions not for money, only because we love doing what we do and on a good day we gain recognition for a job well done. Whoever made the original deserve equal credit, for this reason. I don't see any other issue here, save for the competition rules perhaps.
@@FairLight1337 Ignoring/breaking demoparty competition rules didn't prevent us in Fairlight from winning the demo competition though... OK, I'll leave it now. ;)
What the hell, I've been drawing that way for decades, just because it's easier and faster to do it that way, and as we get older, our spare time is more and more expensive and precious! Obviously who ever was in an uproar over this has way too much spare time! First world problems! What the hell!!!
I am first on line of people who use the tools at my disposal to the best of my abilities. Given that my prome work is technical its judged differently that the art domain. I am fine if there is a category where there are restrictions on what you can use, but I then think it makes sense to have an open category where you can use any weapon in your arsenal.
In 1996 Frank Frazetta wrote out an “Artist Statement” saying his works where “purely from my imagination, no swipes or photographs.” Still there is much evidence of the contrary. Nowadays it's pretty easy to use an image search to come up with the references. AI aided or generated pics should be in separated compo categories. Only my two cents
I think there should be 2 categories. One for nocopy-hand-pixeled-original-art, and the other: anything can go. Then people would not have to compete with machines, or if they decide to do it and win, the more kudos to them. It would also let a lot more of nice pictures to be created. But then, if we are having troubles finding enough participants for one compo, then it might be even harder for two. Or maybe people not submitting stuff because they do not want to compete with AI will post in one, and the ones who are restraining themselves to post pictures in a compo not to spoil it with advanced tools usage could freely post in the other without moral dilemmas. Either way, give credits where credits are due.
My worry is still also that two categories mean spreading the submissions even thinner. The cool thing would still submit a classical entry on the open class as well and win both. :)
I got no iron in this fire, but I don't think Joe was trying to imply that those pixels were real. That said, splitting the compo seems the solution to me. Music did it, and we split demos 3 ways (in general). This is the obvious solution.
I am personally quite curious what dropping of all rules would result in. My analogy of cross country skiing still stands here - I dont want to suggest freestyle to kill classic style. I am merely putting forward the idea as I believe the classic would risk being run over by competent cheaters if we dont.
People sure get funny over stuff we do for fun and entertainment. Full disclosure: all the pixels used to create this message on your screen were plagiarised from my graphics card and video driver. There are no original pixels here. I just typed text into a prompt and the computer made it look like my words. 🤣
This is such a cut and dry argument for me. I'm competing against other sceners in terms of creativity and skill. If you didn't compose the original idea, then I don't care how good your pixelling is, because (as a coder) I can write a brute-force optimal converter for your target graphics mode that will achieve 90% of the same results, does that mean I get to enter the same graphics compo with converted pictures? Graphics compos are judged on creativity + skill. If you omit the creativity part and enter anyway without disclosing it's a copy, you're cheating. Plain and simple.
You think your 90% would ever won over the people who h has the 100% abilities? If not then you dont stand a chance. Its only of you would actually end up winning that the principles are rocking in their foundations.
@FairLight1337 I never claimed my 90% would be just as good. I was claiming that *I shouldn't be allowed to enter*, just like other people who do copies shouldn't really be allowed to enter. Until there are two separate competitions, where copying is allowed in one of them, entries should have completely original composition and creativity. Hasn't it always been this way in compos? Ripped code is looked down upon even if you modified it in some way; copied music is looked down upon even if you spent hours tracking it. Why should graphics be given a special pass?
Code is always on the context of demo. The art aspect is what the code does and a lot of people used the same code for doing the same thing, but put in different context. So Id say thats a difficult category to compare with. Music, I am not competent to hear if a piece of music is 100% original. Only if I like it or not..
@FairLight1337 All I'm saying is that entries should be original and creative. "I don't care as long as I like the results" is cold comfort to the people who spent a lot of time coming up with an original idea but losing to someone who was technically better at copying someone else's work.
I dont disagree - this is just to clarify; There are two aspects. Ideas and implementation. Ideas you compete with AI and as for implementation/setting the pixels, you compete with wireoption.
Id say no. There is still Photoshop and tools on bigger machines involved. Pixcen and Albert are not native tools - they are tools that make it easier and work with the restrictions of the native data format. But people doing the work from start to finish on the native platform with Koala painter and a joystick, Is say no. At least not people winning competitions.
And now the surprising fakt: There's a more fun, important and interesting life than the C64 scene life. A handfull 50 years old man acting like childs here. Hahahahahaha. 😂😂😂
This happens in all communities. People being passionate about it, and then also going ballistisc of people dont act according to the rules in the universe of choice. Look at any community - it will be the same.
I'm gonna keep using photographs and massaging them in Deluxe Paint and Advanced Art Studio, and as far as I'm concerned, I'm perfectly okay if someone hates that. I say to those: you're jealous, show me how you can do better, if you can! For my part, I'm looking for an aesthetically pleasing work, not garbage PC-bucket "pixel artistry" generation Z vomits out today. And most importantly: I couldn't care less about being original. It just has to look good, I don't want "Dutch coding colors".
@@FairLight1337 I don't even care about competing... I just want my productions to look nice. That's all I care about, a slick design to go with my code.
I can't understand this whole debate and the hatred. Everyone who is creatively active gets inspiration from their environment, be it from books, music in museums, etc. I would call it cheating as soon as you use tools to create a quasi 1:1 copy without pushing pixels yourself, which was clearly not the case here. Even if it was a direct conversion, which I don't see a problem with, unless the competition would completely rule out a conversion. As I understand it, Magnar only had good intentions with regard to the competitions, which is why I can understand the debate even less. I wouldn't change the rules of the competitions I mean where would they stop? So basically you could say for the demo competition no cross compilers can be used or coding only on real machines etc. etc. Just my two cents.
The rules indicated no copy and the definition was that there is another original. The rules stipulate you need to think up the motiv yourself. In order to open the discussion I pointed out that it may get be a good thing to have two classes. One classic and one free. Like cross country skiing.
I love A.I. and I think that some people have a build-in tool called a photographic memory. You can start painting or pixel ing , creating a copy of what you have seen. It is all ways a copy. Even if it’s your fantasy from your brain. Anyway, nice topic Bacchus ! By the way, I hope A.I. can also do amazing stuff in creating new code on the c64. I.A. New levels for pinball dreams… 😜🙏‼️
So far AI is great for a lot of things, but in 6502 assembler you get snippets you can use but all I have seen so far is that its not able to make any program that you can actually use, by assembling it right off the bat.
I don't see the problem with this at all. So many artists will go to a location, take a photo and then create an art back at home from their photo, I don't see how this is any different at all.
I suppose I didn't really address the question of using a tool to convert to C64 and that probably should be specified by the 'artist' during submission but I don't know that it'd be good to disallow hand pixelled work in a theoretical 'classic' category, even if a source photograph can be identified.
Im ready to see a difference in recreating a picture that ones has captured oneself, from the creative angle captured by someone else. But none the less, wiring the original is still seen as cheating I guess.
Well, i could write here ... but instead i make it short: "Let every scener decide with feedback (comments & votes), whatever they think about what the "artwork" deserve ... .. . End of story!"
I believe I concluded that there might be a place for all ways of producing graphics, but that its unfair to make certain variants compete. And if you have rules, all entries must follow them.
Agree. But I guess its a bit like doping on sports - its a cat and mouse game of catching the cheaters. The aim is still a clean sport where you dont need doping to win and people who are doped should be found. Here I am also asking the question of if we should have a free class.
Humble thanks. If Magnar is the target ha is surely not that. Top notch composer, coder and party organiser, doing a bit of work in the gfx domain but where his skills are not at par with his other skills.
@@FairLight1337 You mentioned several copying people. So that was towards them in general. I just like to use the word 'lamer' again after 35+ years. :)
All the mentioned ones are really skilled. Its just that not all parts of their past is as glorious. A bit like "I was young and needed the money"...
Месяц назад+2
Ha-ha, just so sad Pontus, really! And honestly you don't even know who John Cage is. Lol! And out of context, well ok, keep on with your game, I keep on with mine. You are losing in the end! "Not in the position of". Well, you are acknowledging recent frauds, fakes, and unworthy price-winners by saying, "look like those who are saying it, cheated in the past". But your argument is so weak. It's not about the past here but the present. And no one is giving anyone a personal discussion about whom they are, what they do, what they achieve. You make yourself a fool here, sorry, but if you can't see it show it to your wife and kids of real-life friends. And psst. Listen to some of your members. They are also on the list who wants a more fair scene-approach to gfx. Aja, Happy Christmas, I guess you won’t even know what that means anymore. And for those who didn't get the John Cage thing, here is some of the artwork I made in a quite different context back in 1998-1999: www.behance.net/gallery/13406265/LEncyclopdie-Gomtrique
The arrogance goes on. Taking the von oben position that anyone not agreeing with you is a lesser person. My heroes are more Vint Cerf, Östen Mäkitalo and Andrew Viterbi. I dont expect you to know them and I dont think less of you for not knowing them. Only the lesser person uses knowledge to piss on others. I compete with my peers - my equals. And I happily talk about them as lesser, as we all know thats just trash talk as part of the game. What you say here is clearly not that. Its talk that comes across as profound arrogance from a small person who uses the arrogance to come across as bigger than he is. That comes across as rather pityful
Back in 1985, saw a B&W line art of Mr.Spock from the back of a Trek fanzine. I had my mom photocopy the drawing onto a transparency. I then taped it to my friend's 1702 monitor, and use his C64 lightpen to paint over what was literally a physical mask. I think I used Doodle. Looked great. Got a commendation for original thinking. It wasn't scanned, but it wasn't technically entirely free-hand drawn either. Yes, my hand did all drawing, but I was using a mask.
This has been used by others as well. Not the entire picture, but as a method to get outline and proportions right.
@@FairLight1337 Really! In 1985 I thought I was pretty clever!
It IS smart. Take a look at the episodes with The Sarge. He did the same to get the outline and outline right.
@@FairLight1337 outline of what? What episode? Got a Title or link?
Episode 35 and 36.
I saw you struggle on "canned heat" and it's origin is in sterno which is a small metal can of a jellied substance that burns. It use outside of it's product use was in a novel. I'm going to have to give you some background here, back in the 1910's to 20's a canned heat drunk was a person who actually drank sterno to get drunk. since it's a form of denatured alcohol, it's quite dangerous to drink but i guess when your addicted and need a drink anything with alcohol will work. Anyway there is a line in the novel "no place like homicide" by J. Archibald back in the 1940's where the term is used as "the canned heat drunk". Please note that during prohibition here in the U.S. lots of hobo's and poor were using cloth and socks to strain the sterno to make something called "squeeze" or if they added fruit juice it was called "jungle juice". It was dangerous, blindness was common and sometimes death so yeah i think in this context though, canned is referring to the fact the car is like a can, made of metal and holds a thing which in this case is a person and heat meaning fast. There is also a slang meaning that i know of which would be a prostitute in jail with a nymphomaniac issue, but I've only ever heard it used derogatorily about women who are good looking but won't give you the time of day. Weird how things change to just stay the same. Anyway hope this helps you out.
Edit: I should add that the first know use of it as alcohol dates back to the early 1910's to 20's. I forgot to put a date but I'm writing this just as I'm leaving with my wife to go see a movie so.... gotta go. :)
Thanks for the added context!
At this point, the Classic and Open categories make sense. There is a guy who traces pictures into deluxe paint using a tablet but never mentions it's as a trace, and people don't know any better and praise the work; if it was marked as open and disclosed that it is a copy, that might be a better way of doing it. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Thanks and the same to you!
Thanks for this nuanced view on things. I like the idea of different compo categories.
Thanks. Also thanks for an entry where I am not assumed to be an idiot.
I am both graphician and coder. I can understand the discussion. For competitions this is important but also in other areas too e.g. game production. For me it is clear, if I (re-)use ideas from others, i have to credit them. I am currently working on a C64 game which is a conversion of a original ZX Spectrum game. I asked the original coder if I can make a C64 version out of it. And ofcourse he will be credited, not only because he did the original game but also because I can use his original levels. In the graphics area it is the same, we "converted" the original title picture to C64 and made our own interpretation out of it, the original author will be mentioned. All graphics are completely pixelled by hand on our own, but if we re-use ideas of others, its clear and only fair to mention them.
But for me the questions go even further: What if I use assembly routines I learned from codebase64 ? Do I need to credit each original author ? How many coders are re-using code or codefragments from others ? I am not the only one. To be fair I decided that I will release my game together with its source code on github and all routines taken from others are marked with comments and a hint from where I have the routine if that routine was not written 100% on my own.
I agree with the creation references. Using routines and snippets of code is stretching it. For copyright there is the concept of a threshold of originality and much of codebase is generic standard implementation of small segments that most people would code the same. So under the threshold for copyright. I use the disk routines on a regular basis, the Cadaver loader and Exomizer - cant say I credit the people behind enough. (i talk to both Magnus and Lasse on a regular basis so they know of my use).
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, Fairlight. I agree that it was a witch hunt against Magnar. Magnar is a colleague and a scene friend that has his ethics in the right place. Thank you for the sober view on the topic.
Hur mblentjanls and the same to you!
You can read the CSDb Forum & the comments under a release without a CSDb account. Nice video..
Thanks!
Wouldn't the easiest be just to make three categories for C64 art? Original work, inspired work and tool assisted work.
Edit: this was just suggested in the video at 18:20 and I have to agree that it seems like the simplest solution.
I am just suggesting two. Classic and open. A third one is a bit much.
i agree with the final point that we need multiple categories so people can have options on how to participate instead of hating on each other and feeling cheated. i'm also proponent of just having showcases instead of competitions, where artist can share their work openly and not battle for placement on who is the best, just admire the different techniques and influences of each other.
I do believe we need competitions, to keep pushing the envelope on whats possible. But also that its impossible to stop wiring tools, AI and other techniques. It will only be a question who cheats and gets away with it unless its addressed.
It's funny how this is exactly the same as the "should unity and unreal engine be allowed in demo compos" conversation couple of years ago. In my opinion scene always mirrors the games industry, and neither of these are an exception to that. Time marches on, tools of content production change, and old men are yelling at clouds.
It was really hard for me to accept that democompo can be won with Tim Sweeney's shaders. Like, even every single shader in the post processing stack of many modern demos ( - and AAA games too) is a huge project in itself, to get them look nice, to work reliably, with all three GPU vendors. I spent a huge amount of time on that stuff, and then it was somehow really hard to accept emotionally that all this was now just a commodity.
People also can't tell. On the C64 as well, people can just see a nice picture on the screen and there's only a small minority who can really tell how this is different from others, and how much pain the author had to go through. Maybe most atleast know that stuff in borders is hard to do, but in mixed oldskool compos, how does it differ from an Amiga?
A gloom view maybe. But abstraction levels will then bring out new innovations, and it's not like oil painting will ever become obsolete. Maybe.
To all - read and he above again. It carries a lot of insight. Thanks for taking the time to write such a great summary.
Some kind of objective approach:
1) If you want to see more new X, reward it by voting it highly. Everyone gets what they wish for.
2) There will always be cheaters who try to win by cheating (defined as: breaking the rules stated for the competition), and cheating is not voted on in sport. It's not allowed in sport, and you can be banned from competing.
3) A competition is like a sport, with winners chosen (and only the winners are celebrated = named/applauded/given prizes at the end of the competition).
1) is solved by declaring the content, everyone votes according to their likes. Ofc cheaters can lie about the content, and then voters will be put on the spot, they suspect but can't be sure.
2) is solved by stating which content you want in the competition (e.g. not released before and drawn by you). Again, cheaters can lie and say that it's content that meets the rules, making 1) very difficult for voters. After the party, organizers decide themselves if they want more content that violates the rules from the same author next year.
3) Demoscene compos are made unsportsmanlike, everyone gets a cookie for participating, there's no voting, and no prizes.
Subjective approach: I think cheating demotivates people from competing, and that the Demoscene can be exclusivist shrinking club, because friends first and foremost vote up friends. I don't mind some drama to inject some spice and life into the Demoscene, but it would be nice if we could be aware of and improve those two things.
After seeing the direct conversion using a coverter program and contrasting it to what Magnar did, it is clearly different. I no longer think he use a program to just do a conversion.
No his isn't a direct wire. The "Carefully selected pixels" clearly is.
Just credit whoever made the original, is all.
No shame, hate or flaming required. Also, if you happen to be an organiser of a party and intend to use AI or plagiarise (albeit tastefully) another artist's work for a competition submission then perhaps do not state any of that to be a violation of the competition rules...
Agree!
@@FairLight1337 All we have is credit. We make our demoscene contributions not for money, only because we love doing what we do and on a good day we gain recognition for a job well done. Whoever made the original deserve equal credit, for this reason. I don't see any other issue here, save for the competition rules perhaps.
Again, agree with that as well. Being an organiser and breaking ones own rules make it a bit trickier though...
@@FairLight1337 Ignoring/breaking demoparty competition rules didn't prevent us in Fairlight from winning the demo competition though... OK, I'll leave it now. ;)
I know we had Boris pictures in old demos, without references. But judging yesterday demos with todays rules is also quite unfair.
What the hell, I've been drawing that way for decades, just because it's easier and faster to do it that way, and as we get older, our spare time is more and more expensive and precious! Obviously who ever was in an uproar over this has way too much spare time! First world problems! What the hell!!!
I am first on line of people who use the tools at my disposal to the best of my abilities. Given that my prome work is technical its judged differently that the art domain. I am fine if there is a category where there are restrictions on what you can use, but I then think it makes sense to have an open category where you can use any weapon in your arsenal.
In 1996 Frank Frazetta wrote out an “Artist Statement” saying his works where “purely from my imagination, no swipes or photographs.” Still there is much evidence of the contrary. Nowadays it's pretty easy to use an image search to come up with the references. AI aided or generated pics should be in separated compo categories. Only my two cents
Your conclusion is basically the same as mine in the video.
I think there should be 2 categories. One for nocopy-hand-pixeled-original-art, and the other: anything can go. Then people would not have to compete with machines, or if they decide to do it and win, the more kudos to them. It would also let a lot more of nice pictures to be created. But then, if we are having troubles finding enough participants for one compo, then it might be even harder for two. Or maybe people not submitting stuff because they do not want to compete with AI will post in one, and the ones who are restraining themselves to post pictures in a compo not to spoil it with advanced tools usage could freely post in the other without moral dilemmas. Either way, give credits where credits are due.
My worry is still also that two categories mean spreading the submissions even thinner. The cool thing would still submit a classical entry on the open class as well and win both. :)
Someone hated someone else's work; haters gonna hate, and that's fine. We all hate things which rub us the wrong way.
Indeed. I try to keep them mind open here. Do haters have a point or are they just haters?
@@FairLight1337 they have a point, but so does the other side, so it's a stalemate. And the planet keeps on turning...
But with an open class we dont stop progress and give people keen to express themselves also using tools and outlet for their creativity.
I got no iron in this fire, but I don't think Joe was trying to imply that those pixels were real.
That said, splitting the compo seems the solution to me. Music did it, and we split demos 3 ways (in general). This is the obvious solution.
I am personally quite curious what dropping of all rules would result in. My analogy of cross country skiing still stands here - I dont want to suggest freestyle to kill classic style. I am merely putting forward the idea as I believe the classic would risk being run over by competent cheaters if we dont.
People sure get funny over stuff we do for fun and entertainment.
Full disclosure: all the pixels used to create this message on your screen were plagiarised from my graphics card and video driver. There are no original pixels here. I just typed text into a prompt and the computer made it look like my words. 🤣
Ha ha ha :)
This is such a cut and dry argument for me. I'm competing against other sceners in terms of creativity and skill. If you didn't compose the original idea, then I don't care how good your pixelling is, because (as a coder) I can write a brute-force optimal converter for your target graphics mode that will achieve 90% of the same results, does that mean I get to enter the same graphics compo with converted pictures? Graphics compos are judged on creativity + skill. If you omit the creativity part and enter anyway without disclosing it's a copy, you're cheating. Plain and simple.
You think your 90% would ever won over the people who h has the 100% abilities? If not then you dont stand a chance. Its only of you would actually end up winning that the principles are rocking in their foundations.
@FairLight1337 I never claimed my 90% would be just as good. I was claiming that *I shouldn't be allowed to enter*, just like other people who do copies shouldn't really be allowed to enter. Until there are two separate competitions, where copying is allowed in one of them, entries should have completely original composition and creativity.
Hasn't it always been this way in compos? Ripped code is looked down upon even if you modified it in some way; copied music is looked down upon even if you spent hours tracking it. Why should graphics be given a special pass?
Code is always on the context of demo. The art aspect is what the code does and a lot of people used the same code for doing the same thing, but put in different context. So Id say thats a difficult category to compare with.
Music, I am not competent to hear if a piece of music is 100% original. Only if I like it or not..
@FairLight1337 All I'm saying is that entries should be original and creative. "I don't care as long as I like the results" is cold comfort to the people who spent a lot of time coming up with an original idea but losing to someone who was technically better at copying someone else's work.
I dont disagree - this is just to clarify;
There are two aspects. Ideas and implementation. Ideas you compete with AI and as for implementation/setting the pixels, you compete with wireoption.
Does anyone still create graphics just on the C64 like in the old days by pixeling images?
Id say no. There is still Photoshop and tools on bigger machines involved. Pixcen and Albert are not native tools - they are tools that make it easier and work with the restrictions of the native data format. But people doing the work from start to finish on the native platform with Koala painter and a joystick, Is say no. At least not people winning competitions.
Wait, wasn't Sarge one of the ones complaining the most about theft and AI?
He dislikes that a lot, indeed.
If someone uses code made in AI, and adjust it here and there and release it in a demo. Is that appreciated in the demoscene?
I appreciate anything tastefully done and looking good. It just has to look good, that's all that matters to me.
I generally thing people accept anything in demos but are picky in dedicated graphics competitions.
And now the surprising fakt: There's a more fun, important and interesting life than the C64 scene life. A handfull 50 years old man acting like childs here. Hahahahahaha. 😂😂😂
This happens in all communities. People being passionate about it, and then also going ballistisc of people dont act according to the rules in the universe of choice. Look at any community - it will be the same.
I'm gonna keep using photographs and massaging them in Deluxe Paint and Advanced Art Studio, and as far as I'm concerned, I'm perfectly okay if someone hates that. I say to those: you're jealous, show me how you can do better, if you can! For my part, I'm looking for an aesthetically pleasing work, not garbage PC-bucket "pixel artistry" generation Z vomits out today. And most importantly: I couldn't care less about being original. It just has to look good, I don't want "Dutch coding colors".
You are clearly one of the guys who strives to compete on an open class. A class with all gloves off and all tricks available.
@@FairLight1337 I don't even care about competing... I just want my productions to look nice. That's all I care about, a slick design to go with my code.
People tend to agree that anything in a demo is open class..
I think it's fair enough to require 100% original work to enter a competition, but, as demonstrated, it's still possible to "cheat" by using AI.
This was not AI. The lion was but not the picture that sparked the controversy.
I can't understand this whole debate and the hatred. Everyone who is creatively active gets inspiration from their environment, be it from books, music in museums, etc.
I would call it cheating as soon as you use tools to create a quasi 1:1 copy without pushing pixels yourself, which was clearly not the case here. Even if it was a direct conversion, which I don't see a problem with, unless the competition would completely rule out a conversion.
As I understand it, Magnar only had good intentions with regard to the competitions, which is why I can understand the debate even less.
I wouldn't change the rules of the competitions I mean where would they stop? So basically you could say for the demo competition no cross compilers can be used or coding only on real machines etc. etc.
Just my two cents.
The rules indicated no copy and the definition was that there is another original. The rules stipulate you need to think up the motiv yourself. In order to open the discussion I pointed out that it may get be a good thing to have two classes. One classic and one free. Like cross country skiing.
@@FairLight1337 Oh I see my bad thanks for clarification!
I like all the perspectives here, so all good
I love A.I. and I think that some people have a build-in tool called a photographic memory. You can start painting or pixel ing , creating a copy of what you have seen. It is all ways a copy. Even if it’s your fantasy from your brain. Anyway, nice topic Bacchus ! By the way, I hope A.I. can also do amazing stuff in creating new code on the c64. I.A. New levels for pinball dreams… 😜🙏‼️
So far AI is great for a lot of things, but in 6502 assembler you get snippets you can use but all I have seen so far is that its not able to make any program that you can actually use, by assembling it right off the bat.
RØV
DJ
I don't see the problem with this at all. So many artists will go to a location, take a photo and then create an art back at home from their photo, I don't see how this is any different at all.
I suppose I didn't really address the question of using a tool to convert to C64 and that probably should be specified by the 'artist' during submission but I don't know that it'd be good to disallow hand pixelled work in a theoretical 'classic' category, even if a source photograph can be identified.
Im ready to see a difference in recreating a picture that ones has captured oneself, from the creative angle captured by someone else. But none the less, wiring the original is still seen as cheating I guess.
No hand pixeled should be fine in the classic one.
Well, i could write here ... but instead i make it short: "Let every scener decide with feedback (comments & votes), whatever they think about what the "artwork" deserve ... .. . End of story!"
I believe I concluded that there might be a place for all ways of producing graphics, but that its unfair to make certain variants compete. And if you have rules, all entries must follow them.
@@FairLight1337 Strict rules make only sense, if you can check them 100%, if you ask me ...
Agree. But I guess its a bit like doping on sports - its a cat and mouse game of catching the cheaters. The aim is still a clean sport where you dont need doping to win and people who are doped should be found. Here I am also asking the question of if we should have a free class.
Lamer. 😅
Me or any of the people features in the video?
@FairLight1337 Lamer(s). That is what we used call the fraude people in the scene.
Not you Fairlight. Fairlight is top notch and 1337.
❤️
Humble thanks. If Magnar is the target ha is surely not that. Top notch composer, coder and party organiser, doing a bit of work in the gfx domain but where his skills are not at par with his other skills.
@@FairLight1337 You mentioned several copying people. So that was towards them in general.
I just like to use the word 'lamer' again after 35+ years. :)
All the mentioned ones are really skilled. Its just that not all parts of their past is as glorious. A bit like "I was young and needed the money"...
Ha-ha, just so sad Pontus, really! And honestly you don't even know who John Cage is. Lol! And out of context, well ok, keep on with your game, I keep on with mine. You are losing in the end! "Not in the position of". Well, you are acknowledging recent frauds, fakes, and unworthy price-winners by saying, "look like those who are saying it, cheated in the past". But your argument is so weak. It's not about the past here but the present. And no one is giving anyone a personal discussion about whom they are, what they do, what they achieve. You make yourself a fool here, sorry, but if you can't see it show it to your wife and kids of real-life friends. And psst. Listen to some of your members. They are also on the list who wants a more fair scene-approach to gfx. Aja, Happy Christmas, I guess you won’t even know what that means anymore.
And for those who didn't get the John Cage thing, here is some of the artwork I made in a quite different context back in 1998-1999:
www.behance.net/gallery/13406265/LEncyclopdie-Gomtrique
The arrogance goes on. Taking the von oben position that anyone not agreeing with you is a lesser person.
My heroes are more Vint Cerf, Östen Mäkitalo and Andrew Viterbi. I dont expect you to know them and I dont think less of you for not knowing them. Only the lesser person uses knowledge to piss on others. I compete with my peers - my equals. And I happily talk about them as lesser, as we all know thats just trash talk as part of the game.
What you say here is clearly not that. Its talk that comes across as profound arrogance from a small person who uses the arrogance to come across as bigger than he is. That comes across as rather pityful