Almost like clockwork, Gregory Paul has just had his (what now seems to be) annual melt down on the Dinosaur Mailing List for the year. As this time around it doesn't really pretain to art (unlike last year), I'm only going to briefly cover it.
There are common trends in this year's version with the last one though. Greg still seems to feel that as the "biggest" and "smartest" Dinosaur fan out there, no one loves them or knows like him so once again he can claim ownership of them and tell the rest of us to piss off. You know because the world works like that.
The particular issue this time is Mr. Paul jumping into a discussion about the origins of flight, and telling everyone to stop trying to touch the subject, as he has magic definitive data that will end the controversy forever... We JUST have to wait the year, to two year, to whenever till he gets it published...
Because remember people science isn't about speculation and theorizing from multiple viewpoints or vantages. It is about dogmatic declarations from a single source (can you believe I STILL dig this guy's atheism writings, despite his palaeontological attitude mimicking religion's dogmatism)
Also note I've specifically linked to the brilliant rebuttal by Dr. Heinrich Mallison and not just Mr. Paul's original post. I thought the reply was really funny in how too the point it is.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Monday, May 28, 2012
Crediting Pictures: An (Un)Official Guide
Given the recent Cretaceous Studies incident and some people's questions on how pictures should be properly credited, I've thrown together this guide on what crediting should (ideally) look like. A lot of this is directly inspired by ART Evolved Admin Glendon Mellow who has put up several very good and important links about art use and artist crediting (here and here being two key ones of many). For a full understanding of the issues surrounding online image use definitely read these posts by Glendon. I'll summarize some of it here, but this post is meant to be a practical demonstration and reference of how you should be posting other people's pictures.
`
So a quick brief on why art/photograph crediting is important.
`
If you run a website, blog, or other online venture, I'm sure it isn't a stretch to say, a big part of the reason you do it is for the sense of positive attention and recognition you get from your visitors. The only thing is if not everything on your page was actually created by yourself, than you alone shouldn't be the only one basking in that attention. If you are using pictures or photographs created by other people to improve your site than you should be sharing your success with them...
`
Using work by others means you are gaining from their time and effort, and unless your paying them money you really should be recognizing this. No matter how much work you put into making and arranging your sites content, artists and photographers typically put a comparable amount of their own work into their art. So even though you are the one who brought their work onto your site for the world to see, your site would be all the less without that picture. Give this contribution to your site the nod it deserves...
`
`
Hopefully the work that went into a piece of artwork should be self evident, but there is a common misconception that photographs are "easy" to take, so its okay to use them as though they are free. Yes in principal one takes (most) pictures by simply snapping a camera, but the catch is that photographs capture an exact moment of time. They are not truly replicatable. More to the point most of the time the photos we seek are of things, places, people, or events we ourselves haven't been able to photograph ourselves (otherwise why didn't you take the photo yourself?). Meaning a photographer who has captured something you haven't, still has expended resources you were not willing to, and thus you are still borrowing this other peron's efforts. So photographs are art, just of a very unique nature...
`
How do we properly share our site's success with those who help create the pictorial content? Easy, credit them by name and link back to their site. That way anyone interested in the pictures and their creator can easily find this artist/photographer, and hopefully help the creator keep making more pictorial stuff for us all to enjoy!
`
`
Frankly it is not only the right thing to do, but most of the time something you have to do (I'll talk about copyright in a bit). Crediting and linking is protection against an artist's wraith should you be using a picture improperly, as it is hard for a creator to get furious if they find you've at least been acknowledging their efforts and sending them potential customers and fans. On the other hand if you have just been taking their stuff and not remotely hinting to their existence or the fact you appreciate their stuff, you could have (legal) problems on your hands.
`
So I've thrown together this quick reference guide of how to reference yours and other people's work. All the artwork is "real" (though please don't judge it, I made them in a hurry for this tutorial only), as are the links and credits. So please feel free to click and see how I've done this crediting. I have permission for all pieces I've used and modified, in addition to just crediting them if anyone was wondering.
`
The trend I hope you'll notice is that the more of your own work appears in your pictures the more options you have for displaying them. As you're effort in the pictures drops so do your options for post them morally and legally...
The categories are:
`
0. Captioning versus Not captioning
1. All My Own Work
2. My Work and Someone Else's
3. All Other People's Work
4. One Last Thing to Consider: Copyright
`
0. Captioning vs. Not captioning
`
For all my other examples I've used captions, which is a useful tool for ensuring the text always accompanies the pictures. This is an easy feature to use on the new Blogger platform and many other online host services. However if you are unable to use captions, you should still be typing out credit lines directly above or below the picture. Not having caption capabilities is no excuse or hindrance to crediting.
`
Non-caption
Picture by Craig Dylke
`
This was not a caption, but is just as functional. Simply type your credit line, align the text as you wish, space it so it is on the line direct under (or above) the picture, and you're done!
`
Caption
![]() |
By Craig Dylke |
Here is the caption. Apart from how Blogger displays it, there isn't much difference here with the actual caption. The benefit is that if I move the picture in the post the credit line automatically follows it.
`
1. Crediting All My Own Work
`
`
`
I start the guide with how to credit your own images and pictures. When you own ALL the content than you frankly can do whatever you want with it. I'm just presenting you with options here.
`
As this is not as sensitive category (the only person you'll be ticking off here with improper crediting will be yourself after all) I'm not going to go into detail, except on watermarking.
`
For this tutorial I've used a picture created by mixing a piece of my own artwork and one of my own photographs. These tips can be used on a singular photo or artwork, or in cases like this where you've mixed more than one thing together...
`
`
Method 1: No crediting or linking
`
`
`
Using your own stuff is the only time it is acceptable to have no credit, caption, or links. As it's all yours, do feel free to do with it as you please. Credits are useful for clarifying whose material it is, but again that's up to you...
Using your own stuff is the only time it is acceptable to have no credit, caption, or links. As it's all yours, do feel free to do with it as you please. Credits are useful for clarifying whose material it is, but again that's up to you...
`
Method 2: Crediting but with no links
Method 2: Crediting but with no links
`
A great way to denote that something is indeed yours, and provides others an easy way to back link and credit you, is to credit yourself. If this is your only site or post about a particular piece or photo you don't need the back link. There is no point in someone clicking to see what they are already looking at! ;)
`
Method 3: Credit and Link
![]() |
By Craig Dylke |
Adding a link to the credit line is the most common method through out the rest of this tutorial, and it works fine for your own work so long as there is a reason. Add the link should only be if you have somewhere different and relevant to send visitors your visitors. In this case I've sent you to my official page for this Dinosaur artwork.
`
Method 4: Watermarking`
`
Now we come to a method that is (in my opinion) only okay for work that is your own, and that is watermarking. This is a fancy term for superimposing words over a picture, like I've done here. They can be more tastefully and artfully done (transparency, fancier colour choices etc.).
`
Watermarks could be thought of as a virtual of stamp of authority. So putting your stamp on your own stuff is fine, but its not good edict to stamp for someone else (especially if they don't even know your using their stuff). There is an implication of authority and ownership with a watermark. So to do it for someone else on implies that you not only have permission to post that person's work, but that this other person endorses your use of it.
`
So my advice don't watermark anything that is not 100% your own. If you watermark for someone else and they don't like your use of their stuff you could aggravate things (compared to the methods listed below)!
Now we come to a method that is (in my opinion) only okay for work that is your own, and that is watermarking. This is a fancy term for superimposing words over a picture, like I've done here. They can be more tastefully and artfully done (transparency, fancier colour choices etc.).
`
Watermarks could be thought of as a virtual of stamp of authority. So putting your stamp on your own stuff is fine, but its not good edict to stamp for someone else (especially if they don't even know your using their stuff). There is an implication of authority and ownership with a watermark. So to do it for someone else on implies that you not only have permission to post that person's work, but that this other person endorses your use of it.
`
So my advice don't watermark anything that is not 100% your own. If you watermark for someone else and they don't like your use of their stuff you could aggravate things (compared to the methods listed below)!
`
2. Crediting My Work mixed with Someone Else's
2. Crediting My Work mixed with Someone Else's
`
So what happens if you mix other people's art with your own? Now we are entering a category where there needs to be some recognition for those who made your final product possible. Regardless if you did a great job photoshopping or drawing around or on top of that other person's stuff. Point is without those other elements the final product wouldn't exist! (Even if you think what you've used is "easy" to reproduce. Instead of giving that lame excuse just go reproduce the element! If you use someone else's effort to save yourself work you need to give credit!).
`
The only correct way to post this sort of composite artwork is to include a credit somewhere.
`
Method 1: Credit and link stuff that is not your own
`
If you only want to minimally put credits by or around your pictures, you can get by with just crediting and linking to the other person. However this is the most minimum you can get away with.
![]() |
Dinosaur by Peter Bond |
If you only want to minimally put credits by or around your pictures, you can get by with just crediting and linking to the other person. However this is the most minimum you can get away with.
`
The credit should make clear what the other person created. Your linking should send visitors to an online portfolio, homepage, or post about the person's art. Here I've linked to Peter's specific post about this art. Just make sure the link is of use to someone wanting more information about the artist, and presents that artist in a positive light.
`
Method 2: Credit and link all components![]() |
Dinosaur by Peter Bond, Photograph by Craig Dylke |
`
The problem with crediting just the other person's work (which you have to do) is that it becomes unclear you were responsible for some of the work in a picture too. Crediting yourself is the answer. There is nothing wrong with plugging yourself when you created the work.
The problem with crediting just the other person's work (which you have to do) is that it becomes unclear you were responsible for some of the work in a picture too. Crediting yourself is the answer. There is nothing wrong with plugging yourself when you created the work.
Just again make sure you're back linking is relevant on yourself. In this case I don't have this picture anywhere else on the web. So there is no need for a link (as if this were on my own site you'd already be on it).
`
`
3. Crediting all other People's Work
`
`
Finally we come to what happens when you use art or photos by just other people. There is only one proper answer. Credit and back link to all the creators involved. Even if you photoshopped it all together, it is NOT your creation. Those elements took other people's time to exist (if you think they were easy to make, than go make your own!) so they need to be acknowledged. Whether it be a single thing you used or a bunch you mixed together. You only have the one option!
![]() |
Art by Glendon Mellow, Photograph by Peter Bond, Optional Credit Photoshoping by Craig Dylke even though it is rubbish in this example :P |
This is pretty straight forward. Acknowledge each creator and their part in your composition. You can credit yourself for mashing the components together, but that should be the last credit (and I'd suggest only if it is a really good effort... I'm half embarrassed putting my name to this as it is not an example of my best work).
`
Once again make sure your links are of use to people seeking more information about the artist, and you'll be good as gold.
`
`
5. The Last Thing to Consider: Copyrights
`
In my opinion if you follow the other guidelines above, especially when using images and pictures by other people, I recon you should not have a major problem like legal action or angry creator declaring war on you if you are crediting them properly. That having been said the above methods do not actually protect your use of the images. You need to be aware of the legal implications of using other peoples' work.
`
If you use an image improperly and a creator comes after you (which is within their legal rights) the outcome can vary from you having to take down the offending image, your whole website being shut down, or an outright lawsuit against yourself! Right away you should check the copyright on any image that is not your own before posting it on your website. Just because you found it on some other site uncredited doesn't mean its okay for you to do the same. When I say it is not okay I mean that both ethically AND legally. Just because someone else is breaking the law doesn't absolve you of the same crime if you commit it too!
`
`
Creative Commons
`
One of the most common copyright types you'll encounter these days is the creative commons. This is a standardized set of image usage criteria established with the theory that image creators AND users would all follow the same rules. This has not worked out mostly due to users. Please don't be one of these image users that ruin a perfectly acceptable universal standard!
`
Most creative commons are denoted by a graphic like this somewhere on an image's page. The vast vast majority of them do not appear on the the image itself. For reference you'll note we here at ART Evolved have one at the very top of our site.
`
Creative Commons can seem confusing if you don't know what they mean. However I've provided this excellent graphic by Milos Janata that should hopefully show you how easy they are to understand.
`
One of the most common copyright types you'll encounter these days is the creative commons. This is a standardized set of image usage criteria established with the theory that image creators AND users would all follow the same rules. This has not worked out mostly due to users. Please don't be one of these image users that ruin a perfectly acceptable universal standard!
`

`
Creative Commons can seem confusing if you don't know what they mean. However I've provided this excellent graphic by Milos Janata that should hopefully show you how easy they are to understand.
`
`
You'll notice a very common requirement here is to mention the creator of anything you have used. So get those credits up!
`
Outright Copyright
`
Some creators just put an all out copyright on their work, which means that you can not legally use that image without their expressed permission. Yes that often doesn't happen on the Internet, but you yourself don't want to get caught breaking the law and simply using the excuse "but they did it too"!
`
Now if there is an image you must use but it is copyrighted, my suggestion is break the law as gently as you can (I'm not pretending to be an angel in this regard... I have been known to post copyrighted work BUT...). Make sure you credit the heck out of it. It is also a good idea to state in that credit you are more than willing to take down the image if requested to by the owner. Also whatever you do make sure you are not making any money from your site or the image use! If you make money (even just from ads) that is asking for the most severe legal recourse!
`
Again showing you at least respect the artist enough to pay them their due in credit should protect you from the worst options they have that their disposal. That said be aware you are still taking a risk in doing this. So do so at your own risk!
`
Mashups and Copyrights
`
All the pictures I used in this demonstration today were composites of multiple pieces, and in all cases (had I not acquired permission from the owners before making this post) I would have been really breaking copyright law!
`
In cases where you are modifying other people's work it is really important to be careful of copyrights. You can open yourself up to the more intense consequences of infringement with derivative works. You should not modify or mix parts of images that have total copyrights or Creative Commons licences that forbid it (and keep in mind nearly half of CC licenses prohibit unauthorized derivative works!).
`
You open yourself up to a lot more action to be taken against your site or yourself. If you are mashing up other people's stuff you should definitely be crediting them!
`
Conclusion
Hopefully the one take home message is that you credit everything and anything that you did not directly create on your website. It not only protects you, but hopefully will help the image creators keep on creating stuff! I'd also caution you to beware of copyrights for the safety of your site/blog and or bank account.
`
Conclusion
Hopefully the one take home message is that you credit everything and anything that you did not directly create on your website. It not only protects you, but hopefully will help the image creators keep on creating stuff! I'd also caution you to beware of copyrights for the safety of your site/blog and or bank account.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
The Dan Varner Tribute Gallery
Welcome to our first tribute gallery in
honour of an amazing paleoartist...
The
world lost one of its greatest paleoartists on the 1st of January 2012, and we
at ART Evolved wanted to honour Dan Varner's memory and work with a
gallery dedicated to the subject matter he held close - prehistoric marine
reptiles and ocean critters.
Not
knowing him personally, we direct you to read a tribute to Dan Varner by his
friend Bruce Schumaker on Oceans of Kansas here.
We
hope this gallery will serve to honour the life and work of Dan Varner, and to
inspire others to follow in his footsteps. If you would like to
participate in this gallery, send your work to artevolved@gmail.com, and
we will post it here.
Click
on the pictures to enlarge them!
We
hope you enjoy this tribute to Dan Varner!
Terminonatator, the last swimmer by Yul Altolaguirre Zancajo
This elasmosaurid was perhaps the last one of the whole elasmosauridae family.
The True Marine Dinosaur
by Craig Dylke
A Hesperonisid, a toothed bird of the Cretaceous. Being a toothed bird
it can be said this is still a non-avian Dinosaur, but only just (if you
do consider this correct).
Note the big nasty salmon ancestor Enchodus also attacking the smaller fish swarm.
Note the big nasty salmon ancestor Enchodus also attacking the smaller fish swarm.
For the full story behind this piece of work, click here.
Cretaceous Shellfish Dinner
by Craig Dylke
Stormy Cretaceous Sea
by Craig Dylke
Heavily inspired by this photo by Stefano Unterthiner
For the full story behind this piece of work, click here.
For the full story behind this piece of work, click here.
Squalodon
by Craig Dylke
Squalodon Orca of the Oligocene
by Craig Dylke
Xinpusaurus by Anthony Contoleon
Xinpusaurus, because the Triassic really did produce some singular fauna, marine and otherwise.
Acanthostega, an early amphibian from
the Devonian by Sarah
Snell-Pym
The plants are
not based on Devonian fossils as I did not have access to any literature on
them so they are made up - however I was basing the picture on the concept that
the development of the "legs" was for pulling itself along weed
chocked shallow waterways rather than walking on land. They had concealed
gills like fished and were probably amphibious in order to get enough oxygen in
the organic rich water. They had eight digits on the front limbs with
webbing between, the number of digits on the back limbs is unknown - they were
very fin like and unlikely to have been able to be weight bearing for walking
on land.
The Reversal: The Evolution of the
Humpback Whale Phylopic by Mike Keesey
Thank
you for checking out this tribute gallery. We are certain Dan Varner
would be honoured by the wonderful work inspired be his talents.
Hopefully you've been inspired to dive underwater and create your own Varner-style work.
Hopefully you've been inspired to dive underwater and create your own Varner-style work.
If
you wold like to add to this gallery, send your submissions to artevolved@gmail.com.
The
next gallery is a return to awesomeness with our Second Pop Culture Gallery!
Get your Dinorider and Flinstones pics in before September 1st 2012 to artevolved@gmail.com.
Get your Dinorider and Flinstones pics in before September 1st 2012 to artevolved@gmail.com.
A summer of paleoart
fun!
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Recall the Dogs (errr Raptors) of War...
I got a very prompt reply from Cretaceous Studies in regard to my recent email, and very clear lines of communication have now been opened. (There is a strong chance my initial email got spam filtered... I only wrote three lines with a link... A classic spam configuration. That was my bad!)
I am declaring an immediate cease fire against Cretaceous Studies for the timing being, as its owner and operator Stan has admitted mistakes were made, and has shown an eager willingness to try to change and fix the problems on his site. An initial move that has impressed me (considering he did it all within hours).
Hopefully we can work with Cretaceous Studies to get Stan's picture crediting and usage up to snuff (and for a few hours effort he has definitely tried quite hard) so he doesn't have this artists up in arms problem against his site again.
The take home message for everyone, especially non-artists, is when trying to approach an art community be sure to extend credit to the artists and image makers that have helped make site interesting. Above all else do not open with a joke about art theft or illegal image use (Stan has admitted that this joke of his really backfired, and I would have to agree putting aside my pitch fork...)
Thank you again to everyone who pitched in and helped us really flesh out this case for Stan to see. Also a public thank you to Stan for taking this seriously, and wanting to make things right!
I am declaring an immediate cease fire against Cretaceous Studies for the timing being, as its owner and operator Stan has admitted mistakes were made, and has shown an eager willingness to try to change and fix the problems on his site. An initial move that has impressed me (considering he did it all within hours).
Hopefully we can work with Cretaceous Studies to get Stan's picture crediting and usage up to snuff (and for a few hours effort he has definitely tried quite hard) so he doesn't have this artists up in arms problem against his site again.
The take home message for everyone, especially non-artists, is when trying to approach an art community be sure to extend credit to the artists and image makers that have helped make site interesting. Above all else do not open with a joke about art theft or illegal image use (Stan has admitted that this joke of his really backfired, and I would have to agree putting aside my pitch fork...)
Thank you again to everyone who pitched in and helped us really flesh out this case for Stan to see. Also a public thank you to Stan for taking this seriously, and wanting to make things right!
The storm is building against Cretaceous Studies...
Our case and momentum against the art thieves at Cretaceous Studies is now really collocking along. To start off with we've identified 70% of the artists whose work was ripped off on this site. So a big thank you to all who took the time to point out an artist or three! Also a huge thank you to those who twitted, Google +ed, Facebooked, or blogged about this case!!! (Sorry I'd try to track down and backlink to as many of you as I could find, but I'm at work with only a little bit of time...)
Progress so far:
1. After discussions with fellow AE administrator and artist rights guru Glendon Mellow, I have decided to directly email Cretaceous Studies, and give them a chance (within a week period) to remove all the pieces we highlighted for which they do not have artist permission (which I suspect is all of them!) OR I would contact all the artists and have them help me contact Tripod to shut down the entire site.
The rational is that while their email and attitude towards art theft was quite irritating, in a way it is a bit extreme to remove all their content without fair warning (really the only content that is just theirs is the writing... most of the other images belong to movie studies or photographers). Please note I said a bit extreme. I'm still perfectly fine engaging in the total shut down strategy should they ignore my reasonable (but sternly worded) demands.
So that email is in their inbox, and I'll be sure to inform you of their response...
2. Now a time limit of a week is fair warning in my opinion as demonstrated by another development on their site...
Cretaceous Studies' new rip off of my photo (original below) |
This new version of my photo popped up on the site since I was last there 9 days ago. I revisited Cretaceous Studies to see if they'd caught wind of our mobilization or not. It seems that overall their oblivious, but someone else seems to have noticed, and demanded either the Tyrannosaur by Joe
Tucciarone and/or Albertosaurus is by
Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka be removed. To me this is the most reasonable explanation for why a new version of just this particular image was replaced, and none of the others (I found all the other 10 as of yesterday).
![]() |
My original photo from The Tyrannosaur Chronicles |
Well that's okay. It means I can be justified in my one week ultimatum. Even if they only take down the 11 images we IDed, I can be assured Cretaceous Studies is out a whole image worth of time on photoshopping for no real gain, as this new version was made in just the last 9 days!
So to the unknown person who demanded the last version of my mutilated and hijacked photo be taken down, thank you! Not only did you correct the wrongs against those other three artists, you've given me a set up for some mild but satisfying revenge of time wastage!
3. Other profile Dinosaur Blogs are starting to take notice and are ceasing the promotion of Cretaceous Studies on their sites. Our friend and member David Orr has removed them from Love In The Time of Chasmosaurs, and we are hoping any other sites that might have them in their blog rolls consider doing the same...
Thursday, April 19, 2012
I'm impressed with Tripod on paper (Let's see how it plays out for real)
As our case against the art thieves at Cretaceous Studies builds (we've identified over half their victims!), I've been looking into our options for going after them on an overall site basis. While the pictures that feature stolen palaeo-art only make up 7-10% of their overall image content, I'd say nine (at moment) separate violations of different people's copyrights should be sufficient cause for at the very least severe sanction by their host server (and this is not mentioning the other 70-80% that feature no doubt equally illegal movie stills). I'm kind of hoping for an outright shut down of the site myself.
Now in looking into what Cretaceous Studies' host server Tripod has to say on image copyright, I'm actually very encouraged. According to my reading on the Tripod site's terms of service, all Tripod users must tick a box in their image uploader stating they own the copyright to anything they upload. Therefore our thieves at Cretaceous Studies have violated their terms of agreement with Tripod. This also means they should not be able to hide behind satire of parody claims when we go after them.
All I need to do now is contact and rally the affected artists, and once I have them all confirming their copyrights were violated, we can inform Tripod. Hopefully, based on what I've read, it should be a pretty clear cut case with this number of substantiated violations.
That said, this is all only in writing. For all I know Tripod is going to disappoint by not actually actively or diligently acting on its terms of service. So for now I'm on the fence, but soon I hope to have many praises for Tripod and its copyright policies soon!
Now in looking into what Cretaceous Studies' host server Tripod has to say on image copyright, I'm actually very encouraged. According to my reading on the Tripod site's terms of service, all Tripod users must tick a box in their image uploader stating they own the copyright to anything they upload. Therefore our thieves at Cretaceous Studies have violated their terms of agreement with Tripod. This also means they should not be able to hide behind satire of parody claims when we go after them.
All I need to do now is contact and rally the affected artists, and once I have them all confirming their copyrights were violated, we can inform Tripod. Hopefully, based on what I've read, it should be a pretty clear cut case with this number of substantiated violations.
That said, this is all only in writing. For all I know Tripod is going to disappoint by not actually actively or diligently acting on its terms of service. So for now I'm on the fence, but soon I hope to have many praises for Tripod and its copyright policies soon!
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Cretaceous Studies is stealing art, help us ID their victims.
So through some dumb luck, and blatant arrogance on the part of the thief (by directly boasting they have been stealing art), we here at ART Evolved were handed a pretty clear cut case of a Dinosaur "comedy" site that has been taking other people's photographs and artwork without crediting them or asking their permission (that alone compensating them) and thinking this is totally acceptable! The case broke here, and I found one of my own photographs taken here. I thought I'd setup a central post about the whole situation...
Here is a quick recap if you're just tuning in. ART Evolved recieved an email invitation to check out and plug the "Center for Cretaceous Studies" website (link included below). However they opened with the line, which we can only presume they thought was a joke, "[a]bout the only 'art' our websites have is stolen or 'not quite legally borrowed' as our lawyers tend to say". They really didn't do any research into their target audience here on ART Evolved apparently, as one thing we do not think is funny is art theft!
This led to a quick check of the site where I found indeed Cretaceous Studies was using several other artist's work, not to mention one of my very own photographs. As I'd never heard of the Cretaceous Studies Center before, but yet there was my photo, I could confirm they had not been obtaining permissions for these images. What broke my patience was they weren't even giving basic credit or backlinks to people whose original content they were using as the basis of all "their" content. I contacted another artist whose work was on the site and he verified they didn't have his permission either.
Why am I going on the warpath? While the use of my photo left me less than impressed, in reality I'll be the first to admit it's not particularly amazing. Rather I'm very annoyed at Cretaceous Studies for their sarcastic attitude towards the subject of content theft. None of this "their" content would exist if not for the original creators they lifted images from. It'd be one thing if they didn't make light of this fact, but to outright boast/joke about it is totally unacceptable! Furthermore they have ads on their site, meaning that any traffic they get due to this "borrowed" content could be giving them money. When you really look at 95-98% of Cretaceous Studies' pictures they are based on other people's work. It doesn't seem right Cretaceous Studies should get 100% the profit from their ads...
I've gone through all their images and collected all those that contained artwork. I assure you that everything else on their site (which I haven't grabbed) used photographs of statues and animatronic robots or stills from Jurassic Park and Walking with Dinosaurs. As identifying these photographs strikes me as a long shot (and the movie stills are a problem for studio lawyers), I am only targeting the clear artwork violations.
I am in the process of contacting all artists whose work has been taken. So far the one artist I have gotten in touch with has managed to get the picture successful taken down in the past 24 hours (I didn't come across it today while collecting these others in any case). So let's try to increase this stat!
To show the Cretaceous Studies people how you're supposed to post pictures, all works you are about to see are from the Center for Cretaceous Studies site.
I have not asked Cretaceous Studies' permission to repost these though, as all these pictures contain components belonging to other people that were uncredited and thus implying they were posted in the first place with no permission (and DO I have two confirmed cases where there were no permissions given) thus they have no right to require me to need permission. While I do not have these original artists' permission either, I am crediting these artists as I find out who they are, and I am more than happy to remove these images if asked to do so! I do credit Cretaceous Studies with photoshopping the elements together, but that is the only acknowledgement I will give them without further crediting or explanation on how these pictures came to be.
If you spot any artwork or photos for which you know the owner or creator that I haven't identified please let us know in the comment section of this post or email us at artevolved@gmail.com.
That Tarbosaurus belongs to Raul Martin, and I am in the process of contacting him about its misuse .
This is a decrested version of Joe Tucciarone's Cryolophosaurus. I am in the process of contacting him.
A big violator, that involves four people including myself. Photograph by Craig Dylke. The upper Tyrannosaur is by Joe Tucciarone and the lower (slightly modified) Albertosaurus is by Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka. I am in the process of contacting them all now...
UPDATE: Thanks to Julio Lacerda we have identified the Carcharodontosaur on the left as that by Gerhard Boeggemann. It should also be noted that the Dinosaur in the middle is simply a still of an Allosaur from one of the BBC's Walking with Dinosaurs programs.
UPDATE: None other than THE Willam Stout was able to identify that Tyrannosaur as belonging to John Sibbick
UPDATE: Our new resident palaeo-art detective JD-man was able to show these Tyrannosaurs belong to Frank DeNota.
Unidentified Works
Please if you know the artist behind any of the Dinosaurs (or for that matter photographer of any of the plates) below!
UPDATE: Thanks to our readers and friends many previously unidentified pieces have now been recognized, so there are now gaps in the lettering scheme. This is a great thing, and we hope soon to have no letters left at all!!!
C.
F.
G.
So if you recognize any of the Dinosaurs or photographs in any of the above images please contact us and/or the affected artist.
We also ask you consider boycotting the Center for Cretaceous Studies site until they either change their stance and practice on art theft (in which they contact artists and photographers to get permission to use and alter their work and/or properly credit and back link to the real content creators) OR they remove all the images which contain unauthorized image components (which frankly is nearly 95% of their sites pictures).
I'll be posting updates and original image credits on this "case" as they come in.
Here is a quick recap if you're just tuning in. ART Evolved recieved an email invitation to check out and plug the "Center for Cretaceous Studies" website (link included below). However they opened with the line, which we can only presume they thought was a joke, "[a]bout the only 'art' our websites have is stolen or 'not quite legally borrowed' as our lawyers tend to say". They really didn't do any research into their target audience here on ART Evolved apparently, as one thing we do not think is funny is art theft!
This led to a quick check of the site where I found indeed Cretaceous Studies was using several other artist's work, not to mention one of my very own photographs. As I'd never heard of the Cretaceous Studies Center before, but yet there was my photo, I could confirm they had not been obtaining permissions for these images. What broke my patience was they weren't even giving basic credit or backlinks to people whose original content they were using as the basis of all "their" content. I contacted another artist whose work was on the site and he verified they didn't have his permission either.
Why am I going on the warpath? While the use of my photo left me less than impressed, in reality I'll be the first to admit it's not particularly amazing. Rather I'm very annoyed at Cretaceous Studies for their sarcastic attitude towards the subject of content theft. None of this "their" content would exist if not for the original creators they lifted images from. It'd be one thing if they didn't make light of this fact, but to outright boast/joke about it is totally unacceptable! Furthermore they have ads on their site, meaning that any traffic they get due to this "borrowed" content could be giving them money. When you really look at 95-98% of Cretaceous Studies' pictures they are based on other people's work. It doesn't seem right Cretaceous Studies should get 100% the profit from their ads...
I've gone through all their images and collected all those that contained artwork. I assure you that everything else on their site (which I haven't grabbed) used photographs of statues and animatronic robots or stills from Jurassic Park and Walking with Dinosaurs. As identifying these photographs strikes me as a long shot (and the movie stills are a problem for studio lawyers), I am only targeting the clear artwork violations.
I am in the process of contacting all artists whose work has been taken. So far the one artist I have gotten in touch with has managed to get the picture successful taken down in the past 24 hours (I didn't come across it today while collecting these others in any case). So let's try to increase this stat!
To show the Cretaceous Studies people how you're supposed to post pictures, all works you are about to see are from the Center for Cretaceous Studies site.
I have not asked Cretaceous Studies' permission to repost these though, as all these pictures contain components belonging to other people that were uncredited and thus implying they were posted in the first place with no permission (and DO I have two confirmed cases where there were no permissions given) thus they have no right to require me to need permission. While I do not have these original artists' permission either, I am crediting these artists as I find out who they are, and I am more than happy to remove these images if asked to do so! I do credit Cretaceous Studies with photoshopping the elements together, but that is the only acknowledgement I will give them without further crediting or explanation on how these pictures came to be.
If you spot any artwork or photos for which you know the owner or creator that I haven't identified please let us know in the comment section of this post or email us at artevolved@gmail.com.
Identified Works
That Tarbosaurus belongs to Raul Martin, and I am in the process of contacting him about its misuse .
This is a decrested version of Joe Tucciarone's Cryolophosaurus. I am in the process of contacting him.
A big violator, that involves four people including myself. Photograph by Craig Dylke. The upper Tyrannosaur is by Joe Tucciarone and the lower (slightly modified) Albertosaurus is by Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka. I am in the process of contacting them all now...
UPDATE: Thanks to Julio Lacerda we have identified the Carcharodontosaur on the left as that by Gerhard Boeggemann. It should also be noted that the Dinosaur in the middle is simply a still of an Allosaur from one of the BBC's Walking with Dinosaurs programs.
UPDATE: None other than THE Willam Stout was able to identify that Tyrannosaur as belonging to John Sibbick
UPDATE: Our new resident palaeo-art detective JD-man was able to show these Tyrannosaurs belong to Frank DeNota.
UPDATE: JD-man was also kind enough to find that the top Gorgosaurus in this picture is by Sergey Krasovskiy. The bottom Gorgosaurus was lifted from National Geographic's Sea Monsters movie's website.
UPDATE: Thanks to Tuomas Koivurinne we now know the recolored Abelisaurus in the background is by Shiraishi Mineo.
Unidentified Works
Please if you know the artist behind any of the Dinosaurs (or for that matter photographer of any of the plates) below!
UPDATE: Thanks to our readers and friends many previously unidentified pieces have now been recognized, so there are now gaps in the lettering scheme. This is a great thing, and we hope soon to have no letters left at all!!!
C.
F.
G.
So if you recognize any of the Dinosaurs or photographs in any of the above images please contact us and/or the affected artist.
We also ask you consider boycotting the Center for Cretaceous Studies site until they either change their stance and practice on art theft (in which they contact artists and photographers to get permission to use and alter their work and/or properly credit and back link to the real content creators) OR they remove all the images which contain unauthorized image components (which frankly is nearly 95% of their sites pictures).
I'll be posting updates and original image credits on this "case" as they come in.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Art Theft Update
Remember yesterday how I shared that email from the sarcastic art thieves? Well, I've confirmed another of their victims: me.
Sadly, I said one of the first thoughts to go through your head was "is any of that art mine?" when an email informs you that "About the only 'art' our websites have is stolen or 'not quite legally borrowed' as our lawyers tend to say." Turns out these instincts and worries were all too true!
Here is what I found:
The offending image. The base photograph is mine, but they've also spliced in stolen artwork from not just Joe Tucciarone, but also Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka!
Here is my original. If you compare the two you can see exactly where they have brushed out Lillian, and cloned elements to fill in and/or extend the photo.
Sadly, I said one of the first thoughts to go through your head was "is any of that art mine?" when an email informs you that "About the only 'art' our websites have is stolen or 'not quite legally borrowed' as our lawyers tend to say." Turns out these instincts and worries were all too true!
Here is what I found:
The offending image. The base photograph is mine, but they've also spliced in stolen artwork from not just Joe Tucciarone, but also Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka!
Nowhere on the page is there a link back to me (or all those other artists) or a credit line...
With this discovery I've decided to reveal the website, more for censorship and boycott reasons. Before you rush off to make sure none of your work is there, and give them more hits and traffic, I can assure I've checked very thoroughly and no one's art from ART Evolved is on this site.
The majority of what they've stolen are people's photographs and movie stills from the Jurassic Park movies, Walking with Dinosaurs, and other CG documentaries. The very few artistic works present are professional level ones like Mr. Tucciarone's (and my other confirmed victim... whom I won't name without permission), that have been mashed into photo backgrounds like mine. Most of the photos are not related to palaeontology (again most of the Dinosaurs are from film stills... 20-30% are photographs of statues from museums or outdoor theme parks) and are either people's family vacation photos or current affairs shots.
The offenders are the Center for Cretaceous Studies, and I would appreciate it if you considered boycotting them (perhaps with one visit to ensure none of your stuff is there). They have demonstrated with their sarcastic remarks about art theft and the outright act of doing it, they have no respect for the actual effort it takes to actually create art or photographs.
The question remains what am I going to do about this?
Normally I wouldn't care all that much about this amateur mashup to my photograph. For one they removed my actual artwork from the photo, and mangled the photograph pretty badly (and in honest neither the art or photo were that amazing to begin with). It's not like what they produced is going to get them famous.
There is a minor issue with them making money off it though. Their site has ads which leads me to suspect they get money from traffic. Some of that traffic is due to their picture content. Guess what I'm a share holder in that content, yet I haven't received a cent.
However to me it is their boastful attitude of knowingly taking this without my permission that has pissed me off so much!
I have a fairly lenient creative commons on this piece. All you need to do is not make any money off it, and credit me for its existence (I did go to the effort of taking the photo, not to mentioning paying to get myself to Australia and into that zoo, something they clearly weren't willing to do). How much is that to really ask? Link back to me... (Well okay and technically contact me if you're modifying my stuff, BUT a link or credit still would have appeased me!).
Since they couldn't be bothered to do that, and have told me directly they think stealing my stuff is worth a joke, I'm going to take measures to have this picture removed from their site. Depending on how that goes that could be the end of it, or simply the beginning (it would be interesting to see what the various studios they've lift stills from would have to say... and I do mean this simply from an academic point of view. What would they do about this infringement on their franchise properties).
Keep you posted. As this is also the second time I've had an annoying misuse of my work I'll throw together what I think a good stand on acceptable uses of your art by others should be.
UPDATE:
Clearly the post I created did after this one has had an effect somewhere. In revisiting Cretaceous Studies to see if they'd noticed the campaign building against them here, I discovered they'd re altered my photo. They'd taken out the artwork by Joe Tucciarone, Jeff Poling and Chris Srnka and replaced it with what I think is a statue (please let me know if I'm incorrect).
That is still my photo though, and I'm now unimpressed that they only removed PART of a stolen piece (probably because they were told to) rather than the whole thing... So I'm sending my ultimatum today and GETTING my photo off (with the pleasant reassurance that I'll be wasting all that time and effort they took to re alter my photo again a mere few days after they put all that work into it).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)