Forum:Art Transparency: Difference between revisions
From the Kingdom Hearts Wiki, the Kingdom Hearts encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
{{EO|time=18:28, 14 June 2014 (UTC)|talktext=But these images are '''not''' yours. I personally feel like taking all this artwork and making it transparent detracts from the "officialism" and original glory of the pieces in question. Making renders and sprites transparent is one thing. Doing it to artwork, however? I don't find it at all necessary. I guess it's because when one makes a render or something extracted from a game transparent for use on the Wiki, that's one thing, because the game is pretty much available to everyone; anyone can take a render of Donald Duck out of ''Kingdom Hearts II'' and pose it to create their own render. But a piece of artwork '''belongs''' to someone. What you're doing here, to me, is equivalent to taking Vincent Van Gogh's ''Starry Night'' and removing the background so you can only and more clearly see the stars and landscape he painted. Maybe the Keyhole and Disney Wiki want the ''Kingdom Hearts'' artwork transparent, but I personally find our images to be fine. I see nothing wrong with leaving the artwork the way it is, since that's how it was released to the world: in its original, non-transparent form.}} | {{EO|time=18:28, 14 June 2014 (UTC)|talktext=But these images are '''not''' yours. I personally feel like taking all this artwork and making it transparent detracts from the "officialism" and original glory of the pieces in question. Making renders and sprites transparent is one thing. Doing it to artwork, however? I don't find it at all necessary. I guess it's because when one makes a render or something extracted from a game transparent for use on the Wiki, that's one thing, because the game is pretty much available to everyone; anyone can take a render of Donald Duck out of ''Kingdom Hearts II'' and pose it to create their own render. But a piece of artwork '''belongs''' to someone. What you're doing here, to me, is equivalent to taking Vincent Van Gogh's ''Starry Night'' and removing the background so you can only and more clearly see the stars and landscape he painted. Maybe the Keyhole and Disney Wiki want the ''Kingdom Hearts'' artwork transparent, but I personally find our images to be fine. I see nothing wrong with leaving the artwork the way it is, since that's how it was released to the world: in its original, non-transparent form.}} | ||
{{Byzantinefire Talk|normal=Well i'm not making the Smile artwork transparent right now or in the future i have been focusing on other images.}} | {{Byzantinefire Talk|normal=Well i'm not making the Smile artwork transparent right now or in the future i have been focusing on other images.}} | ||
{{Xion4ever|time=05:10, 15 June 2014 (UTC)|text=I'm not sure if we all learned this through our adventures in formal schooling, real life, and/or Wiki editing, but just because you edit an image [resize, remove a watermark, flip, make transparent, etc.] does not mean you own it. This is why proper licensing and asking for permission are so critically important. Just a reminder. | |||
It seems to me that some of us agree with artwork transparency. What we haven't determined is what artwork qualifies...Meaning we're back at square one. It's apparent that ENX is strictly against any form of artwork transparency. I'm still not quite sure what to make of this. I'm no image expert by any means, but I fail to see how having some artwork such as [[File:Aladdin (Art) KH.png|50px]] or [[File:Rikku (Concept) (Art).png|50px]] destroys or defaces the artwork. All images, sprites, artworks- anything and everything in the game and/or released in promotion/for the game- belongs to someone. Also, most images, even renders released from official sources, come with a white background. Not sure why, some just do. We aren't making images transparent to deliberately destroy or focus on a specific part; most transparencies are done because the excess white backgrounds are unnecessary and/or distracting. Take the images I've previously listed. I fail to see how "deeply"/darkly/clearly outlined artworks, such as Aladdin and Rikku are negatively affected by transparency. The images are either completely colored in or are so well defined in "pencil" that the "cookie-cutter" style of removing the excess white background is not harmful. Now for "lighter" colored/shaded images such as [[:File:Sora (Early Concept) 3 (Art).png]], I think having a white background is helpful so you can clearly see the image. I think we would be better off using a case by case situation.}} | |||
