Taking it a bit too far?

[Duder 0]

 

 

Post your thoughts.

[vozzz 2]

whats too far? most of his tutorials are based on stuff made by others.

 

or do you mean that perhaps he's being payed by ATnT?

[Duder 0]

No. Trying to recreate shit that took a lot of trial and error by other designers.

 

It was produced by Prologue, by the way. If I was the guy that executed this, I'd be pissed instead of being happy.

[the_Monkey 8]

If I was the guy that executed this, I'd be pissed instead of being happy.

It sounds like you're pissed even though you didn't make it.

 

-m

[silatix 0]

It's mostly annoying when you see the tutorial work popping up in someone elses reel. Its happening more and more unfortunately.

[gui 0]

It's mostly annoying when you see the tutorial work popping up in someone elses reel. Its happening more and more unfortunately.

 

I agree, but that's not a tutorial problem, that's a bad designer problem!

 

What I like in nick's tutorials is this trial and error stuff, just to try to accomplish new things and learn more about the tool. Its not always about make a new or great design, but about to learn c4d too....

[daveglanz 0]

 

 

Post your thoughts.

 

Don't see the issue here-nick and others have shown how to recreate others' work in the past. As long as people watching understand that what you should take away is technique, it's fine. That's not to say people won't copy others work, but you can't blame teachers for teaching.

[Duder 0]

It sounds like you're pissed even though you didn't make it.

 

-m

 

Hence the rhetorical statement.

[Duder 0]

Don't see the issue here-nick and others have shown how to recreate others' work in the past. As long as people watching understand that what you should take away is technique, it's fine. That's not to say people won't copy others work, but you can't blame teachers for teaching.

 

I've never had a teacher show me how someone else did their execution. Then again, my teachers aren't online tutorials and they have integrity.

 

The "problem" is not just the technique, but how much time the designer spent on the concept and execution. Why don't people who WANT to recreate it actually do try going at it? Through that process, they will discover new things that will actually come out the way they want it to be instead of a carbon copy.

 

This is plagiarism, regardless if it's for educational purposes.

 

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

 

It's understandable that people who make tutorials like to teach others...either I'm a screwed up and vile human being or my reasons are logical.

Edited March 23, 2011 by pix3l

[beau+++ 0]

I don't know if I see anything necessarily ethically wrong with breaking down someone's work per se - We've answered plenty of "How was this done?" questions on mograph in the past. A frame-by-frame recreation does straddle that ethical boundary though far closer than a simple text breakdown in a forum does.

 

As far as I know, he hasn't actually released that tutorial yet. Hopefully it'll include a few different examples of similar animations, followed by him walking the audience through an ORIGINAL GSG creation rather than through a frame-by-frame recreation of the AT&T spot.

 

I definitely see where you're coming from pix3l - we all get up in arms when we find someone putting a direct rip of someone else's work in their reels, how is this really any different? Though it is indirect, Nick does profit from these tutorials by building up the GSG brand and then selling things through his site. I'm not suggesting Nick is ripping off the work of others and claiming it as his own, but he is definitely profiting from other people's work here.

 

He's a supremely talented guy. I wish he'd focus his tutorials on how to make cool shit like him, and less on how to make cool shit like others.

 

 

[finegrit 0]

either I'm a screwed up and vile human being or my reasons are logical.

 

There are other possibilities.

 

I don't know. I really don't have a problem with it. Nick's tutorials are very helpful. And he's doing exactly what I did when I started out: take the best shit out there, break it down and figure out how to do it. He's not copying work for a job, and to his credit he doesn't charge for his tutorials. He does them out of the goodness of his heart (or perhaps a secret plan to take over the world, in which case he's an idiot because it is not going to work).

 

I'd be fine with someone breaking down my work for a tutorial. I don't feel proprietary about my techniques, only my ideas. You can steal my techniques and you'll come up with something very different. Plus, once I've figured something new out I'm bored with it. You're always welcome to play with my old toys. I'm working on new shiny ones that you know nothing about.

 

Anyway, I give big thanks to Nick. He does great work. Cheers.

[Duder 0]

I don't know if I see anything necessarily ethically wrong with breaking down someone's work per se - We've answered plenty of "How was this done?" questions on mograph in the past. A frame-by-frame recreation does straddle that ethical boundary though far closer than a simple text breakdown in a forum does.

 

As far as I know, he hasn't actually released that tutorial yet. Hopefully it'll include a few different examples of similar animations, followed by him walking the audience through an ORIGINAL GSG creation rather than through a frame-by-frame recreation of the AT&T spot.

 

I definitely see where you're coming from pix3l - we all get up in arms when we find someone putting a direct rip of someone else's work in their reels, how is this really any different? Though it is indirect, Nick does profit from these tutorials by building up the GSG brand and then selling things through his site. I'm not suggesting Nick is ripping off the work of others and claiming it as his own, but he is definitely profiting from other people's work here.

 

He's a supremely talented guy. I wish he'd focus his tutorials on how to make cool shit like him, and less on how to make cool shit like others.

 

 

 

Thank you for that reply. Completely agree with your statement.

 

If he would break down projects that HE worked on, that's fine. It's his property. Who knows, maybe he got permission from Prologue, but I could be wrong.

 

Yes, he is very talented and I am sure he knows what is ethical or not. I can't speak for anyone else, but if I ever saw anyone make a tutorial off my work, then indirectly profited from it, I would definitely not take legal action, but that person would cease to exist for me. You just don't do that in this industry. I've seen people steal my friends work and I've told them and they know about it. Those people ceased to exist for me and their name has gotten out there for being copycats. Not to say Nick is doing that, but the line begins to blur here.

Edited March 23, 2011 by pix3l

[jon 0]

Oh boy, here we go traveling down the "Secret Mograph Bag of Tricks" road. So some intern spent a days and overnights developing an approach to a designers idea - then crafty GSG comes along and lets the sacred cat out of the bag - welcome to the internet and the new economy.

 

There will always be cut and pasters who just nick the whole tutorial and slap it on a reel / project. Then there are a few who actually get it and will apply the technique to a new project - round and round we go. Be sure to wave to GSG as he heads into the bank.

[jasfish 0]

I think this article brings up some nice points.

 

http://www.fuelyourmotionography.com/is-everything-looking-the-same/

 

As far as GSG and Video Co-pilot go .. I've got no problems with what they do.

They've figured out a way to make some money out of this while still offering

free tutorials. Seems like a fair trade to me.

[Duder 0]

There are other possibilities.

 

I don't know. I really don't have a problem with it. Nick's tutorials are very helpful. And he's doing exactly what I did when I started out: take the best shit out there, break it down and figure out how to do it. He's not copying work for a job, and to his credit he doesn't charge for his tutorials. He does them out of the goodness of his heart (or perhaps a secret plan to take over the world, in which case he's an idiot because it is not going to work).

 

I'd be fine with someone breaking down my work for a tutorial. I don't feel proprietary about my techniques, only my ideas. You can steal my techniques and you'll come up with something very different. Plus, once I've figured something new out I'm bored with it. You're always welcome to play with my old toys. I'm working on new shiny ones that you know nothing about.

 

Anyway, I give big thanks to Nick. He does great work. Cheers.

 

Maybe I care about this too much. I have to, it's my livelyhood. My soul.

 

Execution comes from concepts and they can never be broken apart. They intersect each other. Techniques are born from your ideas.

 

Got nothing against Nick, I'ved seen some of the tutorials.

 

There is an underlying duty for tutorial makers. They should mention that viewers shouldn't use these in their reels or vimeo accounts. Obviously no one is going to listen, but they should make it seem like an embarrassment if they use it in their portfolio.

 

My old techniques are in my toolbox and I don't want to tell anyone shit because it took blood sweat & tears to get there. You can't just throw away what you've discovered.

Edited March 24, 2011 by pix3l

[Duder 0]

Be sure to wave to GSG as he heads into the bank.

 

If you're just in it for the money, they you're in the wrong business.

[beau+++ 0]

There will always be cut and pasters who just nick the whole tutorial and slap it on a reel / project. Then there are a few who actually get it and will apply the technique to a new project - round and round we go.

Why should tutorial creators be exempt from this cut and paste rule? Is he not taking something he saw elsewhere and slapping it on his project/site? Sure, Nick says people shouldn't recreate his tutorials and put them in their projects, but there he is recreating someone else's work and putting it in his project. You can't knock others for being uncreative if you're not being creative yourself.

[daveglanz 0]

It's understandable that people who make tutorials like to teach others...either I'm a screwed up and vile human being or my reasons are logical.

 

Well that's a bit of a black and white statement, isn't it? You're either vile or correct? Your other statement ("my teachers had integrity") makes it sound like people posting tutorials have no morals, which is a pretty big generalization. I think there's a lot of gray area here.

 

I can think of plenty of examples growing up where teachers have taught "covers" of others work - piano lessons, martial arts classes, and learning to do magic tricks as a kid come to mind

 

I see where you're coming form pix - it's not cool at all to profit off of someone else's hard work, but I think it's up to the artist to decide if what someone like Nick is doing isn't kosher. Showing people technique isn't plagiarism - these guys aren't presenting it as their own work or even imitating it for his own benefit.

 

And I realize this is just an assumption, but don't you think that designers who have worked on projects Nick is breaking down and teaching have, in the past, likely learned techniques in a similar way (through coworkers, teachers, etc)?

[KushDesign 0]

Not really a big deal

[beau+++ 0]

I can tell this is gonna be a long heated discussion, so just to clarify my views here:

 

I'm not upset or offended by what he's doing in any way, I just think it straddles an ethical boundary that should be addressed. Everything I've seen from Nick tells me he's a totally stand-up guy, with a serious passion for what he does, and I do totally appreciate 99.9% of what he's doing. I'm not trying to insinuate anything about his character, I just think this whole "recreating others' work" thing might be a bit misguided, but not villainous in any way.

 

My "Masked Magician" post wasn't meant to say "Oh shit, Nick's telling everyone our tricks!" as jon suggested. I half-jokingly wanted to show the parallels between what Nick's doing and what the Masked Magician did - worked as a pro but not rockstar magician for years, then made it big by breaking down everyone else's act instead of creating new illusions for his own act. Traded creativity for status.

 

(Before you all quote me a million times to start an argument, let me reiterate - I don't actually care all that much, I just think it's a good discussion and a topic we should all address)

[Mylenium 0]

Nick's tutorials are very helpful. And he's doing exactly what I did when I started out: take the best shit out there, break it down and figure out how to do it.

 

But then again, couldn't he come up with ideas of his own? Dunno, I'd like to think that Nick is a nice guy, but as far as I'm concerned, he's wasting his skills and talent by doing this. If you cannot come up with an original idea for a "tutorial", then it's just not worth doing it.

 

As long as people watching understand that what you should take away is technique, it's fine.

 

Ah, there's the rub, is there not? These are not "tutorials" or "lessons" even. They are simply step by step instructions on how to build something. Very few people will learn anything from it, much less how to apply the techniques on a more general level. They are too much bent on the how, but never explain the why and that's why they fail or at best end up being rehashed in every beginner reel...

 

Mylenium

[microdot 0]

This is obviously the new trend, but sites like FXPHD, etc still provide great theory and technique for purists.

 

I'm more concerned about the latest trend in PiP webcam tuts featuring a beverage.

 

The Monkey did it best and now there are wannabes lining up.

 

THIS WILL NOT STAND!

[tcastudios 0]

Hands deep in pockets,

kicking tire* going, "Nah, I don't know….eh"

 

 

*

In the mid 70's the Swedish custom car magazine

"Start&Speed" had their winter project, a hotted Beetle

at the 14 day exhibition "Hot Rod Show" in Stockholm.

The car stood fairly close to the aisle and when the show

was over they had to replace the brand new fat tire,

it was all worn to the core at its -side-……

 

 

Cheers

Lennart

[Duder 0]

 

I can think of plenty of examples growing up where teachers have taught "covers" of others work - piano lessons, martial arts classes, and learning to do magic tricks as a kid come to mind

 

 

That's not the best example

 

Classical piano, for example, is taught by professors because that is all they have to base on structured music. They are working from the root, not a branch. Everything in motion right now is pretty much a copy of a copy, even with different aesthetics. So a tutorial shows a copy of a copy of a copy to a newbie audience and they take that copy of a copy of a copy and create a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy.

 

When you get paid to solve problems, it is a bit unprofessional to take one aspect of it and show it to millions of people and go "Aha! YOU SEE! THIS IS HOW HE DID IT!."

[tezuka 0]

The techniques involved in this endtag aren't that sophisticated

as Nick could've easily incorporated them into something different and of his own.

Could be interpreted as a lack of creativity.

 

I mean putting a displace deformer on an Icosahedron, wrapping

circles around it and doing some basic transitions aren't that hard to do.

The things which actually make the endtag breathing are missing in his "copy".

The carefully colored triangles and the attached type on some of the peaks are neat.

Could be interpreted as a lack of craftsmanship.

 

Finally, he's not teaching, he's showing.

There's a significant difference there.

Edited March 23, 2011 by tezuka