Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Duder

Taking it a bit too far?

Recommended Posts

the point i was making is that a designer relies heavily on the novelty of his or her designs. nick is not doing anything wrong. but when his audience shoves these types of tutorials into their reels and sends it to studios and clients, how are they to know which individual was the originator and which was the copycat.

 

I've had this happen - a sample file I made while testing something for one of the bigger tutorial sites was converted into a tutorial, then someone at a place I was working saw my file and said 'hey, I did that tutorial too..." - not a big deal, the original was hardly earthshattering - but certainly made me think twice about how I'd deal with one of these 'guru' sites in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually i've been freelancing for about 3 years now. that "easing into the scene" thread was based on the assumption that there were more knowledgeable folk here who have been doing the freelance rounds for a while. doesn't seem to be the case since most of you guys can't oblige the fact that there is a huge difference between a designer and animator when it pertains to a studio pipeline. let me repeat that, stu-di-o pipe-line. i'm not talking about your 2 month internship at QVC. i'm talking about TDs ADs, and the whole gamut of duties that make up a typical studio pipeline, animators and designers included.

 

the point i was making is that a designer relies heavily on the novelty of his or her designs. nick is not doing anything wrong. but when his audience shoves these types of tutorials into their reels and sends it to studios and clients, how are they to know which individual was the originator and which was the copycat. it's not that the original designer won't get credit, but now they are discredited for having that piece in their reel. producers will say "oh look, another one of the same project. must be a tutorial. trashbin."

 

i've seen countless number of reels that have shiny balls in them. sure it looks cool, but if everyone seems to have them, what makes them special? seen a couple reels with those rotating cubes that royale originally pitched for discovery. and the worst part is they look just as good as the original. were those individuals on the same team that made that spot? maybe royale based that spot off of nick's tutorial and we should take our business elsewhere.

 

of course i know these noobs aren't likely to profit off of borrowed visuals, but the damage goes beyond their own careers.

 

I agree that in some studio pipelines there is a separation between designers and animators. Psyop obviously comes to mind since they've made it known that they don't let their designers animate and vice versa. That's also their philosophy, and while not unique to them, definitely not the standard for everyone. Buck's people do a lot of design and animation across all their spots. And their work is top notch and they're a studio. So, different horses for different courses.

 

I agree about shiny balls. I gather that even the OG shiny balls didn't have much of a purpose or concept except, hey, let's make some shiny balls. Or maybe you prefer schweddy balls.

 

I wish I could get an intership at QVC, they took a look at my reel and haven't called back ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is not a new debate.

 

banksy-rouba-picasso.jpg

 

I's not a Picasso quote. It's been badly paraphrased from T. S. Eliot and the original intention is much different than what the "quote" is generally used as these days (on people's tumblrs).

 

More here:

 

http://nancyprager.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/good-poets-borrow-great-poets-steal/

 

The TS Eliot quote (if you can't be bothered to click and read the whole article):

 

One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest.

Eliot, T.S., “Philip Massinger,” The Sacred Wood, New York: Bartleby.com, 2000.

Edited by brandj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I's not a Picasso quote. It's been badly paraphrased from T. S. Eliot and the original intention is much different than what the "quote" is generally used as these days (on people's tumblrs).

 

More here:

 

http://nancyprager.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/good-poets-borrow-great-poets-steal/

 

I'm sure Banksy knew this and was going for irony...

 

Its actually pretty awesome that Banksy just stole the quote that was stolen, i love street artists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly it just surprises me when I see tutorial work in peoples reels, or worse, on air.

 

Just yesterday I saw this piece being featured on Vimeo using the Discovery Channel blocks device -

 

A few months earlier I saw this old CoPilot tutorial being used as the sting for an Australian newspaper - http://video.heraldsun.com.au/1843807102/St-Albans-attack

 

Is it Nick's (or Andrew Cramer's) fault that this happens? Not sure that it is, even when the tutorial is based around an original design instead of replicating something they've seen on tv, there's always going to be some arsehole that will try to pass it off as their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nick is not doing anything wrong. but when his audience shoves these types of tutorials into their reels and sends it to studios and clients, how are they to know which individual was the originator and which was the copycat. it's not that the original designer won't get credit, but now they are discredited for having that piece in their reel. producers will say "oh look, another one of the same project. must be a tutorial. trashbin."

 

i've been lucky enough to have sat next to some very talented "designers", and they are very touchy with their work. i've also seen reels literally get trashed because of the most faint traces of tutorial work and plagiarism.

 

I think these two points are golden in this whole discussion.

 

1. Nick's not doing anything wrong.

2. If you put any tutorial based work into your reel, whether it's from Nick or Video Co-pilot, fxphd, HYPA, anyone .. be prepared to have it dismissed. That might not be fair, but I think that's a real risk you run.

 

Those of us who have been doing this for awhile can spot these a mile away. I've actually seen some very well done work that takes a Greyscale tutorial and turns it into something unique. But I still thought of it as a Greyscale tutorial, for better or worse. And that's what sucks to me. You can do something fairly original, but if it's based on someone else's tutorial, it's hard not to reference that in your mind.

 

I work at a small post-house in Milwaukee, and even here, most of the reels we get are almost all tutorial based. They look a lot better than they did 5 years ago, but it doesn't give me any more confidence in taking a chance on them. In fact, it makes me wonder how they'll actually perform under a deadline and working on something that isn't based on a tutorial.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think there's anything wrong with doing these tutorials. I still do a lot of C4D tutes, trying to get better all the time.

 

But generally I think it's a huge mistake to put anything even remotely based on a tutorial in your reel. Maybe that's being harsh, but I think in the long run, you'll be better off. Believe me, I've made that mistake & I think it's held me back in some ways. So take that for what it's worth.

 

Which reminds me, I really need to get my new reel finished up & posted ASAP ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying the college lecturers are the teachers and Nick's the talker, or Nick's the teacher and this forum's users are the talkers?

I think I intentionally phrased it ambiguously so that the reader could draw their own conclusions.

But at 100+ replies in the last 24hrs... I was referring to the latter... but that's what forums are for. ;)

 

Incidentally... I have paramount respect for good teachers.

 

Also, not sure if anybody noticed it, but TarzanJesus noted that Nick's latest tutorial isn't really that dissimilar from the icoso-atom-array-tutorial he did 6 months ago.

 

-m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the surest tests [of the superiority or inferiority of a poet] is the way in which a poet borrows. Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest.

Eliot, T.S., “Philip Massinger,” The Sacred Wood, New York: Bartleby.com, 2000.

 

 

Doesn't quite roll off the tongue in the same way, though, does it? :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if gsg didn't exist i'd probably still be struggling with c4d. i have definitely learned a lot of techniques and basic settings in the software. however, i would never ever straight up use tutorial material as is on a reel. however, i admit that i have completed a few rush jobs with little budget where i justified using tut material; the equivalence of using stock material.

 

now, as for the "ripping off" situation, i see it as nothing more than heading over to mograph and asking "how'd they do this?" unfortunately nick broadcasts to a much larger audience whether they want to know or not...and then the market is flooded with demo reels consisting of tut material and the original source may or may not be degraded in value (does discovery still use their cube wipe imagery? idk.

 

i'm definitely on the fence though whether i think what he's doing is altogether wrong. on one hand i want to equate it to a magicians guild where if you give away the trick you get blacklisted.

 

ie: gobbluth245x300.jpg

 

and on the other hand it's a valuable source for other creatives. i could go on and on but i'll end it here (it's really just an excuse to post a photo of gob bluth).

 

ps. the link to this thread is posted in the latest gsg live cast. i haven't watched it yet, but i definitely will just to hear his opinions on all of this.

Edited by thekinginyellow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I intentionally phrased it ambiguously so that the reader could draw their own conclusions.

But at 100+ replies in the last 24hrs... I was referring to the latter... but that's what forums are for. ;)

 

Incidentally... I have paramount respect for good teachers.

 

Also, not sure if anybody noticed it, but TarzanJesus noted that Nick's latest tutorial isn't really that dissimilar from the icoso-atom-array-tutorial he did 6 months ago.

 

-m

 

That would be Ironic if the original endtag was a variation of a GSG tutorial only for GSG to do a tutorial on something that is based off of one of his tutorials.

 

gsgtutorial.jpg

 

Although I really doubt that is the case here but it would be f'n hilarious if one day that happened.

 

Son of a bitch. Just realized contemplates is spelt wrong. See??? when you rush!

Edited by C-FU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mostly it just surprises me when I see tutorial work in peoples reels, or worse, on air.

...there's always going to be some arsehole that will try to pass it off as their own.

 

1. Nick's not doing anything wrong.

2. If you put any tutorial based work into your reel, whether it's from Nick or Video Co-pilot, fxphd, HYPA, anyone .. be prepared to have it dismissed. That might not be fair, but I think that's a real risk you run.

 

Those of us who have been doing this for awhile can spot these a mile away.

 

An interesting thought just crossed my mind. I read through most of the comments and didn't see it mentioned.

 

It seems to me that creating a tutorial for something as ubiquitous as the ATT logo animation essentially guarantees that no one is putting it on their reel, doesn't it? Even the least trained eye is going to spot that gem no matter what someone does to hide it. I'm starting to think that these "how'd they do that?" tutorials might be better for the community as a whole. It's a lot harder to hide a copy of something that everyone has seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be Ironic if the original endtag was a variation of a GSG tutorial only for GSG to do a tutorial on something that is based off of one of his tutorials.

 

gsgtutorial.jpg

 

Although I really doubt that is the case here but it would be f'n hilarious if one day that happened.

Brilliant. Love the GSG Lightbulb!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant. Love the GSG Lightbulb!

 

All in good fun.

 

Your tutorials actually have been of great use. They helped me in my transition from Lightwave 3D to C4d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was made that by deconstructing popular motion gfx by other studios, he drums up more traffic then he would by doing original work. That's the part that bothers me, piggybacking off of other's work to sell some extra presets. I believe he's not that insidious, but you can't deny he loves the spotlight. Nick, do more original stuff and if your mission truly is to educate the newbs, focus on ideation, concepting and workflow. Y'know, like the tuts Monkey's been doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good golly miss molly, I'm not trying to insult you. But your defensiveness and name calling are a bit childish to say the least. I don't think I was using "arbitrary rhetoric," just coming to Novus4D's defense.

 

Of course you don't need to post a link to your work, but you also don't need to call others on this forum "fart knocks," "plagiarists" (incorrectly), and tell us that your teachers were/are better than ours and others, and then expect us not to wonder "who is this?"

 

Your post opened a good discussion about the nature of tutorials and the ethics behind 'em. We agree on some things here ("If you're just in it for the money, they you're in the wrong business." - TOTALLY AGREE!). I wish you'd try to see some of the shades of gray here.

 

Relax, Dave.

 

What's more childish is you trying to call me out because I don't have a link to my portfolio. If I wanted feedback, I wouldn't ask you. Seen your work :)

 

There is no need to personally attack anyone here because this discussion has to do with something bigger than any individual person.

 

I don't see a gray area. It's very black and white for me. There is a reason why high end studios are successful. That's one thing I agree with Nick (Yes, I did watch the first 10 minutes, but I couldn't bother to watch the whole thing—have better things to do. I did not really see a good argument coming from the video, it seemed more like a personal stance rather than a consensus).

 

Wouldn't that be more dangerous than what he's doing now?

 

I guess at the end of the day, there are people who can take away bit and pieces from what he does and use it to execute their own ideas, and people who are going to do the same thing but change the bg color or the type or something arbitrary. Thats just how it goes.

 

How many commercials do you see that have some outlandish character talking about their product after Isaiah Mustafa and The Most Interesting Man in the World campaigns launched?

 

I'm not saying it's ok, just that it's inevitable. Theres enough shit to worry about out there without sweating balls over a guys tutorials.

 

No. First off, there is no way to know what process the original team went through to make whatever they did. We need a PDF of that and sit down with the team who worked on it.

 

And this endtag is not the best they've done, it just stands out because someone wants to do yet another tutorial on something that's been done by a high end studio.

 

How do you define something that has good execution? Do you say it's "cool" or it's "awesome"? Is that the most you designers can do?

 

The point I was trying to make is that if you can't talk about WHY something was successful and break it down BEFORE trying to recreate it instead of calling it "awesome" or "cool", then please don't make a tutorial about it.

 

I'm not sweating balls at all, I don't really care about what happens. It's just something that's been bugging me about the motion industry and the over-saturation of shitty motion that's been populating the internet.

 

I'm not the only one here that thinks this way. Many of my peers who are great designers think the same way.

 

And no one is saying Nick should stop what he's doing. He should just create new stuff and break that down.

 

daft? had to look it up, never used the word myself, "insane, mad; silly; stupid"

 

wow, what a nice way to put it....

 

See this is where it's getting confusing: "If you're just in it for the money, they you're in the wrong business." , yet you openly claim that you refuse to share your secrets and techniques that you have developed.

 

Honestly im starting to think that you don't post a link to your work because you are afraid people will make tutorials on how to make it. Which until recenlty, would've been probably unlikely. But now I think i just might if your work gets posted =)

 

 

AND:

 

"Very poor judgement on a person you have never met." REally? and who's fault is that. if you had any kind of reputation apart from being outspoken, then maybe i would know you better. This thread has generally been a pretty interesting read ( read the whole thing now), but mostly you just offend people anonymously. And you're other majore supported Killkill, who seems to have the same values as you, and also lacks a profile... The only people I've met in this industry with your attitudes are those who constantly try so screw over people starting out in the industry by not paying them... Generally the people i've met and talked to in this industry are friendly, supportive and love to share their knowledge, so really makes me think who you are, and who are these rockstar designers you've met.

 

you don't have to post a link to your work, but it makes it kinda difficult to take your opinions seriously, you could be 12 for all we know...

 

Relax, cupcake.

 

I'm not even going to reply to your long post. Not worth my time.

 

Pix3l,

 

You are being quite childish. In my post not once did I say anything to the effect of "this is a dumb discussion it should die", in fact, I specifically said "this is a great discussion" so your "lil Wayne" gibberish is misplaced.

 

Not only are you in a blinding rage but your also not adding anything of substance in response to anyone's points now. I actually agree with some of your criticisms but youre too "daft" to see that i guess? Stick to a constructive criticism. When you resort to namecalling and putting down of many other designers, many of whom you don't even know, and some I'm sure that are better people and designers than you are, you're credibility comes into question.

 

I believe I've done my share of constructive criticism on this forum. I never stop learning from others and my failures. I don't know what point you're trying to create to assassinate my name here.

 

How have I put down other designers?

 

Also there is always going to be someone out there that's better than you. Your post makes no sense to me.

 

I might sound like a dick sometimes, but I can't help it. I'd like to think that I'm a fairly nice guy, but have the integrity to stay honest. Why sugarcoat things when there is no reason to do so? We're all here to learn and grow and create things that haven't been tested yet. If you ever stop learning, then you shouldn't be in this industry. Go be a lawyer.

Edited by pix3l

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point was made that by deconstructing popular motion gfx by other studios, he drums up more traffic then he would by doing original work. That's the part that bothers me, piggybacking off of other's work to sell some extra presets. I believe he's not that insidious, but you can't deny he loves the spotlight. Nick, do more original stuff and if your mission truly is to educate the newbs, focus on ideation, concepting and workflow. Y'know, like the tuts Monkey's been doing.

 

Exactly, firemind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find seems to be the main point of contention is that fact that the tutorial is regarding a specific piece. If Nick had posted "HAI GUYZ, CHECK OUT THIS COOL DESIGN." would that have been as a big of a deal?

 

Or what if he said "Hey, I saw this cool design on TV so I thought I would see if I could recreate it. Check it out." would that have had such a big splash?

 

Seems to me that if he posted it without giving proper credit, that would have been way way worse from our point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might sound like a dick sometimes, but I can't help it. I'd like to think that I'm a fairly nice guy, but have the integrity to stay honest. Why sugarcoat things when there is no reason to do so? We're all here to learn and grow and create things that haven't been tested yet. If you ever stop learning, then you shouldn't be in this industry. Go be a lawyer.

 

Dude your my fuckin spirit animal ... I totally agree.

 

The amazing thing about this industry is that you'll never get bored with it (you might get tired of all the b.s. work you have to do for shitty studios --- but thats another story). You can always find new things to learn, or you might have some piece that your trying to make but it's pushing the boundaries of your abilities. Evolution and learning are a must to be successful and I love the fact that everyday I learn something that makes me better/faster/stronger and all-in-all a better mograph artist

 

aaaaaaaaaaand scene :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...so in conclusion,

 

nick, we loved having you, but you got to go.

 

:D :D :D

 

 

 

all kidding aside i hope mr. campbell doesn't take any of this as a personal hit to his own integrity. but rather a reminder to the integrity of his audience. not all of them, but you know who you are. ya bastards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We agree on some things here ("If you're just in it for the money, they you're in the wrong business." - TOTALLY AGREE!). I wish you'd try to see some of the shades of gray here.

 

Relax, Dave.

What's more childish is you trying to call me out because I don't have a link to my portfolio. If I wanted feedback, I wouldn't ask you. Seen your work :)

 

 

 

All this backhanded BS slap and tickle... And the bit about being in the wrong business to be making money - shit what planet are you living on?

 

If GSG wants to offer up free tutorials on opening stuck jars of mayonaise to pump traffic to and sales for his products then good for him! Thats how a website works - and that's how you make money in your sleep.

 

Perhaps some of you need to concentrate on billing heavy instead of pontificating artistic integrity while bedroom mographing and stirring shit up on the internet. And the whole "I'm keeping it real by being a dick" line is played out - especially on Mograph.net.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...